0:00:02 > 0:00:06The art world, where paintings change hands for fortunes.
0:00:06 > 0:00:08Selling at 95 million...
0:00:08 > 0:00:10But for every known masterpiece,
0:00:10 > 0:00:12there may be another still waiting to be discovered.
0:00:12 > 0:00:14- Well, that's it. - Well, that's it, isn't it?
0:00:14 > 0:00:17That is it, that is our painting.
0:00:17 > 0:00:19International art dealer Philip Mould and I
0:00:19 > 0:00:23have teamed up to hunt for lost works by great artists.
0:00:23 > 0:00:27We use old-fashioned detective work and state-of-the-art science
0:00:27 > 0:00:28to get to the truth.
0:00:28 > 0:00:32Science can enable us to see beyond the human eye.
0:00:32 > 0:00:34- Isn't that incredible?- Yeah!
0:00:34 > 0:00:38The problem is not every painting is quite what it seems.
0:00:38 > 0:00:40I paid about £100,000 for it.
0:00:40 > 0:00:42That is a lot if it's a fake.
0:00:42 > 0:00:45It's a journey that can end in joy...
0:00:45 > 0:00:48- Aw, isn't that great?- Wonderful.
0:00:48 > 0:00:51..or bitter disappointment.
0:00:51 > 0:00:54They are declaring that your painting be seized
0:00:54 > 0:00:55and then destroyed.
0:00:57 > 0:00:59In our first new investigation,
0:00:59 > 0:01:03we take on one of the biggest names in 20th-century art -
0:01:03 > 0:01:05Laurence Stephen Lowry.
0:01:08 > 0:01:10We're on the trail of three small oil paintings
0:01:10 > 0:01:14by Britain's best loved modern artist,
0:01:14 > 0:01:17bought by a self-made man with a passion for art.
0:01:18 > 0:01:21They should be worth a small fortune,
0:01:21 > 0:01:23but uncertainty about their origin
0:01:23 > 0:01:26means they could be worth nothing at all.
0:01:26 > 0:01:28Yeah, they are worthless.
0:01:28 > 0:01:32The trouble is LS Lowry is one of the most frequently faked artists,
0:01:32 > 0:01:36his simple style making him a soft target for notorious forgers.
0:01:36 > 0:01:39You've just got to kind of get this on as fast as you can,
0:01:39 > 0:01:41especially if you want to do a fake.
0:01:41 > 0:01:45Can we prove that these three paintings are genuine works?
0:01:46 > 0:01:48Look, there they are!
0:01:48 > 0:01:50Look, that's it. That's them.
0:01:50 > 0:01:54Or could there be a more sinister explanation?
0:01:54 > 0:01:56So we're dealing with a rogue pigment.
0:01:56 > 0:01:58Possibly a rogue painting.
0:02:07 > 0:02:09We're heading to the north-west of England
0:02:09 > 0:02:12to follow up a lead on a small collection of artworks
0:02:12 > 0:02:18thought to be by LS Lowry, the region's most celebrated artist,
0:02:18 > 0:02:23best known for his smoky industrial scenes of Northern life.
0:02:26 > 0:02:32We've come to see a man who has just inherited three works
0:02:32 > 0:02:35that he believes are by LS Lowry.
0:02:35 > 0:02:39The problem is he can't quite prove that they are.
0:02:41 > 0:02:43And the other problem is that Lowry, as you know,
0:02:43 > 0:02:49is one of the most faked artists around, so it could be complicated.
0:02:51 > 0:02:53We've arranged to meet property developer Stephen Ames
0:02:53 > 0:02:55in Neston near Cheshire.
0:02:56 > 0:03:00- Hi, Steve.- Hi, Philip. How are you? - Very well, very nice to meet you.
0:03:00 > 0:03:01And you.
0:03:01 > 0:03:04He's brought us to the home of his late father, Gerald,
0:03:04 > 0:03:08who died last year, aged 87, leaving behind several artworks -
0:03:08 > 0:03:11including a trio of possible Lowrys.
0:03:11 > 0:03:14Well, this is a lovely collection, isn't it? These look great.
0:03:14 > 0:03:16I think this is probably my favourite,
0:03:16 > 0:03:17this lady here with the two dogs.
0:03:17 > 0:03:19It is a wonderful, quirky image,
0:03:19 > 0:03:22done in a slightly abstract form against that white background -
0:03:22 > 0:03:25typical, in a sense, of Lowry.
0:03:25 > 0:03:29The one above, I'm so pleased we've got a crowd scene by him
0:03:29 > 0:03:31cos he is so famous for that.
0:03:31 > 0:03:33All these little figures are all slightly separate
0:03:33 > 0:03:36- one from the other.- Yeah, rather lonely, slightly dislocated.
0:03:36 > 0:03:39What about this rather marvellous pair here?
0:03:39 > 0:03:42Yeah, he loved quirky subjects.
0:03:42 > 0:03:45He had this perpetual eye open for the opportunity.
0:03:45 > 0:03:49One feels that this is based on something, if it is by Lowry,
0:03:49 > 0:03:52that the man encountered.
0:03:52 > 0:03:54Born in Lancashire in 1887,
0:03:54 > 0:03:58Lowry became fascinated by the factories and everyday life
0:03:58 > 0:04:02of Manchester and Salford, where he lived and worked as a rent collector.
0:04:02 > 0:04:04Often sneered at by the art establishment,
0:04:04 > 0:04:10he painted for decades in obscurity before finding fame in old age.
0:04:10 > 0:04:16By the 1960s and '70s, he was wildly popular - a genuine people's artist.
0:04:16 > 0:04:19And, after he died, even the subject of a chart-topping song.
0:04:19 > 0:04:24# And he painted matchstalk men and matchstalk cats and dogs... #
0:04:24 > 0:04:27Many of Lowry's admirers were new to art buying
0:04:27 > 0:04:30and keen to stay in touch with their northern roots -
0:04:30 > 0:04:31just like Stephen's father, Gerald.
0:04:31 > 0:04:34And this is your dad here, is it? Let's have a look at these pictures.
0:04:34 > 0:04:37- He looks quite a character. - He was, he was quite...
0:04:37 > 0:04:40- That's your mum, is it? With the beehive?- It is, yes.
0:04:40 > 0:04:42And your dad looks like something out of Mission: Impossible!
0:04:42 > 0:04:44- Tremendous.- Well, that's right, that's him.
0:04:44 > 0:04:47- It's a 1970s period piece really. - It really is.
0:04:47 > 0:04:49The son of a nurse and merchant seamen,
0:04:49 > 0:04:54Gerald Ames was a self-made man who became a successful company director,
0:04:54 > 0:04:57able to afford the finer things in life.
0:04:57 > 0:05:00Have you got another picture there? What's that one underneath?
0:05:00 > 0:05:02I think this is slightly earlier.
0:05:02 > 0:05:06He bought this plane, I'm sure, in 1969 or 1970,
0:05:06 > 0:05:08so it's all the same period.
0:05:08 > 0:05:11What a dude your dad was! Great childhood you must have had,
0:05:11 > 0:05:13growing up with all these boys' toys.
0:05:13 > 0:05:15We did, we did have a fantastic childhood.
0:05:15 > 0:05:18- He was a bit of a connoisseur himself, was he?- He was, yes.
0:05:18 > 0:05:20He was a connoisseur himself.
0:05:20 > 0:05:24He was, he was quite a keen amateur painter himself
0:05:24 > 0:05:28and he was a great fan of Lowry and other northern artists.
0:05:28 > 0:05:31He brought them really all within a year, these three certainly,
0:05:31 > 0:05:33I should think 18 months anyway.
0:05:33 > 0:05:36Do you know where your father bought these pictures? Were they from auction?
0:05:36 > 0:05:39No, they weren't from auction and that I do know.
0:05:39 > 0:05:43I remember him going down with my mother and going through them,
0:05:43 > 0:05:47and looking at them in a gallery. I do remember that.
0:05:47 > 0:05:50He wouldn't have bought them at auction, he wasn't that...
0:05:50 > 0:05:52- So he bought them from a dealer? - Yes.
0:05:52 > 0:05:55- Sounds like a man of taste.- Yes
0:05:55 > 0:05:59The problem for Steve is there are no records to show where and when
0:05:59 > 0:06:01his father bought the Lowry paintings,
0:06:01 > 0:06:06so there's no real evidence to show that they are authentic Lowrys.
0:06:06 > 0:06:08So, what has happened now?
0:06:08 > 0:06:11You've tried to prove these pictures are by Lowry?
0:06:11 > 0:06:16We had everything valued and because I couldn't find anything...
0:06:16 > 0:06:18You couldn't find any documentation?
0:06:18 > 0:06:21No. I could for everything else but not on these three.
0:06:21 > 0:06:23You've given us a horrific challenge
0:06:23 > 0:06:27because without the paperwork, without the receipts,
0:06:27 > 0:06:30without the proof that your dad actually bought these things...
0:06:30 > 0:06:33Yes, I know. Look, Philip, I promise you,
0:06:33 > 0:06:35I've been through thousands of pieces of paper
0:06:35 > 0:06:38and my brother has, if anything, more than I have,
0:06:38 > 0:06:40and my wife - who's a lawyer -
0:06:40 > 0:06:43and they're good at going through pieces of paper!
0:06:43 > 0:06:46We can't find anything.
0:06:46 > 0:06:49God, so here we have a man who knew a bit about art,
0:06:49 > 0:06:52bought three paintings in Lowry's lifetime
0:06:52 > 0:06:54and now you're stuck with them.
0:06:54 > 0:06:55Yeah.
0:06:55 > 0:06:59I mean, they are worthless without authentication.
0:06:59 > 0:07:02At the moment, Steve. Come on.
0:07:02 > 0:07:05If they are by Lowry, Philip, what would they be worth?
0:07:05 > 0:07:08Steve, this is just going to really frustrate you
0:07:08 > 0:07:12because if we were to start with the old couple,
0:07:12 > 0:07:15I can see that making 40, 50,000.
0:07:15 > 0:07:21I can see the quirky lady in black with the dogs making 60,000,
0:07:21 > 0:07:24possibly even a little bit more, it's so beguiling.
0:07:24 > 0:07:26As for the crowd scene, well,
0:07:26 > 0:07:29that could even touch 100,000.
0:07:29 > 0:07:33You're looking at over £200,000 worth of pictures here if,
0:07:33 > 0:07:36and you haven't got it, if you can get the paperwork.
0:07:36 > 0:07:38Yeah.
0:07:38 > 0:07:40- Expensive paperwork.- Yeah.
0:07:42 > 0:07:47We're not the first to search for proof that the three paintings are genuine,
0:07:47 > 0:07:52with several auction houses drawing a blank after months of enquiries.
0:07:52 > 0:07:54The fact that they weren't authenticated
0:07:54 > 0:07:57or they wouldn't be authenticated sort of,
0:07:57 > 0:08:03it upset me a bit because it's about his memory really
0:08:03 > 0:08:06and he wasn't the type of person who would be duped, in my view,
0:08:06 > 0:08:09particularly in this period of his life.
0:08:09 > 0:08:12It's a point of family pride for Steve
0:08:12 > 0:08:14to prove that the three pictures are genuine.
0:08:14 > 0:08:18His father was passionate about the art of the north-west of England,
0:08:18 > 0:08:22buying works by Alan Lowndes and Pat Cooke, a protege of Lowry,
0:08:22 > 0:08:24from reputable galleries.
0:08:26 > 0:08:28A profitable spell in the early '70s
0:08:28 > 0:08:33allowed him to splash out on quality works
0:08:33 > 0:08:37and this is when Steve thinks his father must have bought the Lowrys.
0:08:42 > 0:08:44But in the absence of a paper trail,
0:08:44 > 0:08:48the only real evidence that these pictures might be genuine
0:08:48 > 0:08:49lies in how they look.
0:08:52 > 0:08:57To find out how far they resemble authentic works by LS Lowry,
0:08:57 > 0:08:59Fiona and I have come to Salford Quays,
0:08:59 > 0:09:04home of the Lowry Centre, where over 400 of his works are held.
0:09:05 > 0:09:09This is arguably his most famous picture -
0:09:09 > 0:09:121930, Coming From The Mill.
0:09:12 > 0:09:15Lowry said that he would start a painting
0:09:15 > 0:09:18by blocking in the buildings
0:09:18 > 0:09:20and then the people afterwards.
0:09:20 > 0:09:21Looking at these buildings,
0:09:21 > 0:09:24you get the sense that that's what he's done there, don't you?
0:09:24 > 0:09:28Yeah, very much so. I see with Lowry that the architecture,
0:09:28 > 0:09:35which is incredibly important, acts a bit like the stage props
0:09:35 > 0:09:39and the characters, the actors who impart the emotion
0:09:39 > 0:09:40are the figures at the bottom.
0:09:40 > 0:09:44By setting these figures against a light background,
0:09:44 > 0:09:47he's conveying a sense of emotion, a sense of thought.
0:09:47 > 0:09:50Let's face it, he's probably the most distinctive artist at work in Britain
0:09:50 > 0:09:52in the 20th century.
0:09:52 > 0:09:55Above all, Lowry's work is deceptively simple -
0:09:55 > 0:09:57almost primitive.
0:09:57 > 0:10:01A classically trained painter who resented being billed an amateur,
0:10:01 > 0:10:06Lowry's work broke with convention. He called them dreamscapes
0:10:06 > 0:10:09and in the post-war years, often filled them with quirky,
0:10:09 > 0:10:11even grotesque, characters.
0:10:13 > 0:10:16It's these works which have the closest resemblance
0:10:16 > 0:10:17to Steve's paintings.
0:10:19 > 0:10:23The old woman in The Funeral Party, painted by Lowry in 1957,
0:10:23 > 0:10:26is uncannily close to the woman in Steve's picture.
0:10:29 > 0:10:31This painting, Figures In A Street,
0:10:31 > 0:10:36is strongly reminiscent in the skyline and the composition
0:10:36 > 0:10:37of Steve's crowd scene
0:10:37 > 0:10:41and Lowry's trademark black dogs are everywhere,
0:10:41 > 0:10:43sometimes looking almost catlike,
0:10:43 > 0:10:47just as they do in Steve's picture, Lady With Dogs.
0:10:49 > 0:10:51Encouraged by the similarities
0:10:51 > 0:10:54between Steve's pictures and Lowry's genuine work,
0:10:54 > 0:10:56we're meeting up with Dr Bendor Grosvenor,
0:10:56 > 0:11:00Fake Or Fortune's specialist art researcher.
0:11:00 > 0:11:04He's been hunting for information about the history of the paintings.
0:11:05 > 0:11:07- Hi.- Hi there.
0:11:07 > 0:11:10Well, can I start with the picture I think is the most promising
0:11:10 > 0:11:13of our three? I think it's Lady With Dogs.
0:11:13 > 0:11:17I think, as we always like to do, I'd like to start on the back
0:11:17 > 0:11:22because we have what looks like a rather promising stock number.
0:11:22 > 0:11:24I'm hoping that that's going to tie in
0:11:24 > 0:11:27with this label from the Lefevre gallery down here.
0:11:27 > 0:11:29Now, Lefevre is a very interesting name
0:11:29 > 0:11:32because Lefevre and Lowry had a long and close connection.
0:11:32 > 0:11:35Lefevre was the first gallery to mount a solo exhibition
0:11:35 > 0:11:37of Lowry's work in 1939.
0:11:37 > 0:11:39In fact, I'm told none of the paintings sold
0:11:39 > 0:11:41and Lefevre bought some of them themselves
0:11:41 > 0:11:44so as not to disappoint Lowry too much. But then,
0:11:44 > 0:11:47by the time it came to the 1960s, it was an event for the glitterati.
0:11:47 > 0:11:51Lowry's exhibitions would sell out on the first day.
0:11:51 > 0:11:55Importantly, the Lefevre gallery is still around today.
0:11:55 > 0:11:57We need to know if they've got any archives
0:11:57 > 0:12:00- and, if so, we need to get access to them.- Mmm.
0:12:00 > 0:12:05One slight problem perhaps with Lady With Dogs is the signature,
0:12:05 > 0:12:07which is written on in Biro.
0:12:07 > 0:12:09Did Lowry do his signatures in Biro?
0:12:09 > 0:12:12Actually, you're not the first to point that out
0:12:12 > 0:12:13and be worried about it.
0:12:13 > 0:12:16The auction house who first checked out these pictures said,
0:12:16 > 0:12:20"Why shouldn't it be painted or scratched in as he often did?"
0:12:20 > 0:12:22That was a question mark also.
0:12:24 > 0:12:26'When it comes to our other two pictures, though,
0:12:26 > 0:12:28'there's precious little to go on.'
0:12:28 > 0:12:34We've got an old couple, dated 1957 and then an undated crowd scene.
0:12:34 > 0:12:37Looking at the back of these, it's potentially a bit less promising.
0:12:37 > 0:12:38Those two white stickers that leap out at us
0:12:38 > 0:12:42are from this auction house, which checked out the paintings, nothing more.
0:12:42 > 0:12:44But if you look at the old couple on the left,
0:12:44 > 0:12:46the inscription says Darby and Jones.
0:12:46 > 0:12:49I think I think that's probably meant to read Darby and Joan.
0:12:49 > 0:12:51- So, the old married couple.- Exactly.
0:12:51 > 0:12:54Quite a common subject for artists at that point.
0:12:54 > 0:12:56Not fantastically rich pickings, is it?
0:12:56 > 0:12:58We have got something else to go on
0:12:58 > 0:13:01because Steve mentioned a name to me, Andras Kalman,
0:13:01 > 0:13:04who you will know was a well-known London art dealer
0:13:04 > 0:13:08who dealt in Lowry, amongst others. That's a possible connection.
0:13:08 > 0:13:10Yes, well, in fact, his gallery, Crane Kalman, still exists.
0:13:10 > 0:13:13I'll go along and see what they have in their archives.
0:13:13 > 0:13:15Yeah, we really need to crack the provenance on this
0:13:15 > 0:13:17but also the science.
0:13:17 > 0:13:22No-one has really got to grips with what Lowry looks like as an artist up close.
0:13:22 > 0:13:25It's about time we put him under the microscope.
0:13:30 > 0:13:33I'm on my way to meet one of Fake Or Fortune's experts
0:13:33 > 0:13:37in the scientific analysis of paintings, Libby Sheldon.
0:13:39 > 0:13:43She's been studying Lowry's artistic techniques
0:13:43 > 0:13:46and is keen to examine Steve's paintings up close
0:13:46 > 0:13:49to see if they bear any hallmarks of the master
0:13:49 > 0:13:53or any ominous signs that they were created more recently.
0:13:53 > 0:13:58First, she needs to free them from their overpowering 1970s frames.
0:13:58 > 0:14:01I mean, this was a common way of putting pictures in their frames.
0:14:01 > 0:14:04- We don't do it so much now. - That's a good thing, isn't it?
0:14:04 > 0:14:08- Yeah.- It shows it's got some age anyway.
0:14:08 > 0:14:09Wonderful.
0:14:09 > 0:14:12Actually, it looks a lot fresher than it did, doesn't it?
0:14:12 > 0:14:16Probably because the glass was slightly discoloured.
0:14:16 > 0:14:18This is very interesting to see it without the glass
0:14:18 > 0:14:21because it looks to me as if there isn't a varnish on this
0:14:21 > 0:14:23and never has been.
0:14:23 > 0:14:27Lowry was very adamant that his paintings shouldn't be vanished.
0:14:29 > 0:14:32Now on to Darby And Joan, our old couple.
0:14:32 > 0:14:36Unlike the other two pictures, this one is painted on a wood panel,
0:14:36 > 0:14:41but does this make it more or less likely to be a genuine Lowry?
0:14:41 > 0:14:46To me, the wood is a great thing because Lowry loved wood.
0:14:46 > 0:14:49It's a slightly more difficult thing to get a piece of wood
0:14:49 > 0:14:54that is in good condition in order to create a fake.
0:14:54 > 0:14:59- That's interesting. So wood gives you a little bit more comfort?- Yes.
0:14:59 > 0:15:01Now...
0:15:02 > 0:15:05Oh, yes.
0:15:05 > 0:15:06Fabulous.
0:15:06 > 0:15:08God, isn't that interesting?
0:15:08 > 0:15:12- You can now see the texture in a way that you couldn't before.- Yes.
0:15:12 > 0:15:16I mean, it's applied really thickly, isn't it?
0:15:16 > 0:15:20Yes, and also, it tumbles over the edges. Look.
0:15:20 > 0:15:22I mean, if this is by a faker,
0:15:22 > 0:15:25it's by someone who knows their way around a pot of paint.
0:15:25 > 0:15:26Very competent, yes.
0:15:30 > 0:15:35Libby is taking tiny samples from the surface of Steve's paintings
0:15:35 > 0:15:38to find out precisely what pigments are present.
0:15:38 > 0:15:43Lowry claimed that he only ever used five particular pigments.
0:15:43 > 0:15:45"I am a simple man
0:15:45 > 0:15:48"and I use simple materials," he said.
0:15:48 > 0:15:52"My colours are and always have been
0:15:52 > 0:15:54"Flake White," also known as lead white,
0:15:54 > 0:15:57"Ivory Black, Scarlet Vermilion
0:15:57 > 0:16:01"Prussian Blue and Yellow Ochre," -
0:16:01 > 0:16:06just five colours and always from the Windsor & Newton company.
0:16:06 > 0:16:11These should be the only ones Libby's tests reveal in Steve's paintings.
0:16:11 > 0:16:14Anything out of the ordinary could spell trouble.
0:16:18 > 0:16:21While we wait for the results of Libby's scientific analysis,
0:16:21 > 0:16:24I'm doing some research into the market for Lowry's works.
0:16:25 > 0:16:28You just have to have a quick look on the internet to see quite
0:16:28 > 0:16:32how many Lowrys there are for sale here. I mean, it's just amazing.
0:16:32 > 0:16:35There are some going for £3.65 -
0:16:35 > 0:16:38mind you, that's had four bids. There's one here for £340.
0:16:40 > 0:16:44"Wonderful northern art, original oil painting, LS Lowry."
0:16:44 > 0:16:47Now, it says original painting and then it says LS Lowry.
0:16:47 > 0:16:49It doesn't say original painting by LS Lowry,
0:16:49 > 0:16:52but that's what you'd think and it's signed by LS Lowry.
0:16:52 > 0:16:55"No provenance for this one, I'm afraid," no surprise there.
0:16:55 > 0:16:58"Gorgeous colours, lots of figures to be seen in this painting."
0:16:58 > 0:16:59Oh, listen to this -
0:16:59 > 0:17:02"I'm selling this beautiful painting from my LS Lowry collection,"
0:17:02 > 0:17:04no less.
0:17:05 > 0:17:08It's very interesting. It's staying on the right side of the law,
0:17:08 > 0:17:12but only just. This is...
0:17:12 > 0:17:14You know, this is an industry you're seeing here.
0:17:16 > 0:17:19The art market might be awash with modern Lowry copies,
0:17:19 > 0:17:22but I've found troubling evidence that his work was being forged
0:17:22 > 0:17:25as early as the 1970s -
0:17:25 > 0:17:27precisely when Steve's dad
0:17:27 > 0:17:29is thought to have bought his paintings.
0:17:29 > 0:17:34I have managed to find somebody who was faking Lowry as early as 1969.
0:17:34 > 0:17:38Now, he was a man called John Green
0:17:38 > 0:17:40and he lived, appropriately enough, on the Costa Del Sol.
0:17:40 > 0:17:44He would say, "Lowrys are a piece of cake to copy."
0:17:44 > 0:17:47To begin with, he would sell them for a few hundred quid,
0:17:47 > 0:17:51a few thousand pounds. After Lowry died, suddenly,
0:17:51 > 0:17:53John Green realised he could make even more money from Lowrys
0:17:53 > 0:17:57and he would start to charge £40,000 a time for his paintings.
0:17:57 > 0:17:58This was serious money.
0:17:58 > 0:18:03Who knows how many fake Lowrys by John Green are in the market?
0:18:03 > 0:18:05It's impossible to say.
0:18:07 > 0:18:12I'm worried about how tainted the market for Lowry's works might be,
0:18:12 > 0:18:14so I've arranged to meet James Rowland,
0:18:14 > 0:18:17former head of modern art at Sotheby's,
0:18:17 > 0:18:21to find out why Lowry became such a soft target for forgers.
0:18:21 > 0:18:24James, how often would Lowrys be bought to you
0:18:24 > 0:18:28and has a fake ever come across your desk and you thought it was genuine?
0:18:28 > 0:18:32There are pictures that come up that take a lot of thinking about.
0:18:32 > 0:18:33Is that a yes?
0:18:34 > 0:18:37- Well, it just shows how difficult it is, doesn't it?- It is very tricky.
0:18:37 > 0:18:39Even you have been taken in?
0:18:39 > 0:18:43It's very tricky to be able to pin something down categorically.
0:18:43 > 0:18:45What should we be looking out for?
0:18:45 > 0:18:48You've lots of Lowry fakes in your time.
0:18:48 > 0:18:50What sets alarm bells ringing for you?
0:18:50 > 0:18:52To fake a Lowry successfully,
0:18:52 > 0:18:58you need to be able to replicate the technique, replicate the palate...
0:18:58 > 0:19:01Which, of course, was limited cos he only used five colours, by and large.
0:19:01 > 0:19:04But that in itself means you need to replicate
0:19:04 > 0:19:05the spirit of the pictures.
0:19:05 > 0:19:07Presumably with Lowry,
0:19:07 > 0:19:11a fake is going to go after the more popular Lowry subjects -
0:19:11 > 0:19:14the mills, the crowd scenes, that kind of thing.
0:19:14 > 0:19:17Yeah, that's very much the path that you are going to see
0:19:17 > 0:19:20most people following if they are going to fake a Lowry
0:19:20 > 0:19:21because that's what he's known for.
0:19:21 > 0:19:25It's the street scenes, the chimneys, figures with dogs,
0:19:25 > 0:19:28that sort of thing and, of course, towards the end of his life,
0:19:28 > 0:19:34those smaller panels with the one or two figure groups.
0:19:34 > 0:19:38I suppose probably because they are perceived to be a simpler kind of picture.
0:19:38 > 0:19:40The apparent simplicity of Lowry's work
0:19:40 > 0:19:43has been exploited by forgers to such an extent
0:19:43 > 0:19:47that there is currently no official body prepared to authenticate
0:19:47 > 0:19:49newly discovered works.
0:19:49 > 0:19:52It occurs to me, having talked to James,
0:19:52 > 0:19:55that we are probably going to have to work even harder with Lowry
0:19:55 > 0:19:57than we have with any other artist we've dealt with in the past
0:19:57 > 0:19:59because he is so widely faked.
0:19:59 > 0:20:03We're going to have to put together an absolutely watertight argument
0:20:03 > 0:20:06for these Lowrys. When it comes to the panel of people
0:20:06 > 0:20:08who ultimately will verify it,
0:20:08 > 0:20:11even if they think it probably is a Lowry,
0:20:11 > 0:20:14unless they are 100% sure,
0:20:14 > 0:20:16they're going to err on the side of caution and say no.
0:20:18 > 0:20:22If we're going to convince a specially assembled panel of experts
0:20:22 > 0:20:26to accept Steve's pictures as genuine, we need provenance -
0:20:26 > 0:20:29hard evidence that shows a chain of ownership
0:20:29 > 0:20:31beginning with Lowry himself
0:20:31 > 0:20:34and ending with Steve's dad, Gerald Ames.
0:20:34 > 0:20:38We think he bought Lady With Dogs, the most promising picture,
0:20:38 > 0:20:40from the Lefevre gallery
0:20:40 > 0:20:42and our research into the label on the back of the picture
0:20:42 > 0:20:44has suddenly borne fruit.
0:20:46 > 0:20:49I've just had a fascinating e-mail from my gallery staff.
0:20:49 > 0:20:52They've come across a picture in Cheshire,
0:20:52 > 0:20:53same county where Steve lives,
0:20:53 > 0:20:57a painting by Lowry, fully authenticated
0:20:57 > 0:21:01and the fascinating thing is on the back of it is a number beginning with X,
0:21:01 > 0:21:06very similar to the style of number we have on the lady with the two dogs!
0:21:08 > 0:21:11I've come to Wright Marshall auctioneers in Knutsford.
0:21:11 > 0:21:147,300 now, at 7,300 seated...
0:21:14 > 0:21:17At 7,300, all yours...
0:21:17 > 0:21:19With the sale already in progress,
0:21:19 > 0:21:23I've persuaded them to let me have a sneak preview of the genuine Lowry
0:21:23 > 0:21:26and there's something remarkable about it.
0:21:27 > 0:21:30This is the most extraordinary coincidence.
0:21:30 > 0:21:34This picture, a fully authenticated Lowry, it's got all the paperwork,
0:21:34 > 0:21:36is about to be sold downstairs in about an hour's time.
0:21:36 > 0:21:40We've managed to sneak it up here to have a look but just look at it -
0:21:40 > 0:21:44it's exactly the same frame as that around Steve's.
0:21:44 > 0:21:46Carved, gilded, with a canvas slip,
0:21:46 > 0:21:50but the best bit comes when you turn it over
0:21:50 > 0:21:53because not only have you got a label - a Lefevre label,
0:21:53 > 0:21:56exactly the same as the one on Steve's, looks like the same typewriter -
0:21:56 > 0:22:00move your eye up, and this is the knockout blow.
0:22:00 > 0:22:03You've got the number X9102, another X number
0:22:03 > 0:22:06but just look at the number, 9102.
0:22:06 > 0:22:09Compare it to Steve's, 9101!
0:22:09 > 0:22:12So we are left with the extraordinary conclusion
0:22:12 > 0:22:16that these two pictures must have hung together in the same exhibition,
0:22:16 > 0:22:18probably at Lefevre. They belong together.
0:22:18 > 0:22:24Now, surely the most sophisticated faker couldn't think of that one?
0:22:24 > 0:22:28Lot 1125.
0:22:28 > 0:22:32The rather special LS Lowry oil painting, People In A Street.
0:22:32 > 0:22:38Signed, completely authenticated, full bill of sale and provenance
0:22:38 > 0:22:42all the way back to its original purchase from the Lefevre gallery,
0:22:42 > 0:22:46'72. We've got that all-important little X number on the back as well.
0:22:46 > 0:22:49I'll start you straight off, in at £50,000...
0:22:49 > 0:22:52At 50,000, I bid, who's in next?
0:22:52 > 0:22:5451, 52, 53...
0:22:54 > 0:22:55At 54, 55...
0:22:55 > 0:22:58Not surprisingly, bidding is brisk.
0:22:58 > 0:23:0260,000, at £60,000 now...
0:23:02 > 0:23:05Any further bids? Going once, twice...
0:23:05 > 0:23:08Three times at £60,000, all done now...
0:23:08 > 0:23:11Yours, sir, thank you, at £60,000.
0:23:11 > 0:23:17So, with auction tax and commission, that painting made £75,000
0:23:17 > 0:23:19but make no mistake,
0:23:19 > 0:23:22it wasn't just the picture that made that sum of money -
0:23:22 > 0:23:24it was the all-important bill of sale,
0:23:24 > 0:23:28that piece of paper that Steve doesn't have for his little picture.
0:23:30 > 0:23:32Philip's discovery in Cheshire should help our quest
0:23:32 > 0:23:35to prove that Lady With Dogs is authentic,
0:23:35 > 0:23:38but there's precious little information about the provenance
0:23:38 > 0:23:42of Steve's other two pictures, Crowd Scene and Darby And Joan.
0:23:45 > 0:23:48The only lead we have is that Steve's father, Gerald Ames,
0:23:48 > 0:23:51knew the founder of the Crane Kalman Gallery,
0:23:51 > 0:23:55who specialised in the sale of Lowry's art in the '70s.
0:23:55 > 0:23:59Bendor is keen to find out whether they might have sold him the pictures.
0:24:01 > 0:24:05- Splendid, more things. - The box of goodies.
0:24:05 > 0:24:06LS Lowry's old stock...
0:24:06 > 0:24:08Today, the gallery is headed by Robin Light,
0:24:08 > 0:24:10a leading expert on Lowry.
0:24:10 > 0:24:13He's offered to show Bendor what a genuine work
0:24:13 > 0:24:15sold through Crane Kalman should look like.
0:24:15 > 0:24:18As a rule, of course, it doesn't happen with everything
0:24:18 > 0:24:20cos labels fall off or they get changed by frame makers,
0:24:20 > 0:24:23but we tend to always look for this, it's very simple,
0:24:23 > 0:24:28Crane Kalman label - title, artist, date, buyer.
0:24:28 > 0:24:34Here, we have, "Lowry, Two People, sold in December 1973."
0:24:34 > 0:24:38If we reference the ledger, we go to '73 and here we have it,
0:24:38 > 0:24:43"13th of December 1973, Two People sold for £2,500."
0:24:43 > 0:24:46- So, that's the system working perfectly...- Absolutely.
0:24:46 > 0:24:48- ..and we're a bit stuck here.- Yep.
0:24:48 > 0:24:51With no labels on two of our paintings,
0:24:51 > 0:24:54is there any evidence of a sale to Gerald Ames
0:24:54 > 0:24:56in the gallery's ledgers?
0:24:56 > 0:25:02I've checked out the pages from 1969 through to '75
0:25:02 > 0:25:06and cannot find any reference at all for a G Ames.
0:25:06 > 0:25:08Robin, if I fail completely in my mission
0:25:08 > 0:25:11to find any provenance for these two paintings at all,
0:25:11 > 0:25:15would you ever feel confident enough about just making attribution
0:25:15 > 0:25:18on the basis of what you see there in the image itself?
0:25:18 > 0:25:24I think we would be very dismissive of selling something
0:25:24 > 0:25:27without a track record, especially with Lowry.
0:25:27 > 0:25:29It was known in the '70s, I think
0:25:29 > 0:25:32pictures were coming from Spain and all sorts of other places.
0:25:32 > 0:25:35I think I'd say, hand on heart, we wouldn't straightaway say,
0:25:35 > 0:25:36"Yes, we'll buy these,"
0:25:36 > 0:25:39I would have to say, "Yes, we'll buy these
0:25:39 > 0:25:43- "if we can corroborate the provenance."- OK, all right.
0:25:43 > 0:25:48With so little information about the origins of Crowd Scene and Darby And Joan,
0:25:48 > 0:25:51how can we be sure they're not clever forgeries?
0:25:52 > 0:25:54My research into Lowry fakes
0:25:54 > 0:25:57has turned up a disturbing case from 2007.
0:26:01 > 0:26:04For years, George and Olive Greenhalgh and their son Shaun
0:26:04 > 0:26:07have cheated galleries and art dealers by passing off forgeries
0:26:07 > 0:26:10as treasured artefacts.
0:26:10 > 0:26:13Shaun Greenhalgh was sentenced to four years in prison
0:26:13 > 0:26:18for faking everything from antiquities to modern art,
0:26:18 > 0:26:21including the work of LS Lowry.
0:26:26 > 0:26:28Today, he's a reformed character
0:26:28 > 0:26:31and he's agreed to help our investigation.
0:26:31 > 0:26:35He's offered to show us how he went about creating a fake Lowry
0:26:35 > 0:26:39and any warning signs we should look out for in our pictures.
0:26:39 > 0:26:42Shaun, you successfully faked Lowrys
0:26:42 > 0:26:44even while you were at school, didn't you?
0:26:44 > 0:26:48Yes, 15, I think was my first successful Lowry I managed to do.
0:26:48 > 0:26:50When you say successful, you managed to sell it you mean?
0:26:50 > 0:26:53Yeah, through a dealer who used to deal in Lowry's work
0:26:53 > 0:26:55when he was alive, yeah.
0:26:55 > 0:26:58Shaun's meticulous approach to painting a fake Lowry
0:26:58 > 0:27:01showed just how difficult it can be to tell the difference
0:27:01 > 0:27:04between a forgery and the genuine article.
0:27:04 > 0:27:07You've just got to kind of get this on as fast as you can,
0:27:07 > 0:27:10just slosh it on initially, get the texture into it.
0:27:10 > 0:27:14He used quite a lot of paint, Windsor & Newton...
0:27:14 > 0:27:16- Yeah, Windsor & Newton paints. - He was a good customer.
0:27:16 > 0:27:18- Of course, these five colours. - Yes, just the five
0:27:18 > 0:27:21and especially if you want to do a fake,
0:27:21 > 0:27:23you'd stick to the actual colours,
0:27:23 > 0:27:27so you didn't have any kind of controversy. That would be important.
0:27:27 > 0:27:31When you saw art experts and eminent figures in the art world
0:27:31 > 0:27:33authenticate your paintings,
0:27:33 > 0:27:36what did that make you think about their level of connoisseurship?
0:27:38 > 0:27:41In a lot of cases, I think it's found wanting.
0:27:41 > 0:27:44Provenance is, as we all know in the art world,
0:27:44 > 0:27:47more important really than the actual work of art.
0:27:47 > 0:27:50- Well, to many people it is. - Cos of people like you, Shaun.
0:27:50 > 0:27:52Exactly, yeah.
0:27:52 > 0:27:55If it wasn't for you churning out your Lowrys,
0:27:55 > 0:27:58people wouldn't be placing the emphasis on provenance that they are.
0:27:58 > 0:28:01Absolutely, that's a point, yeah. A lot, there are a lot...
0:28:01 > 0:28:04- So you are responsible for that. - Maybe, yeah.
0:28:04 > 0:28:06You have, you do have a point.
0:28:10 > 0:28:12It's painstaking work,
0:28:12 > 0:28:17trying to precisely replicate a very spontaneous artist.
0:28:17 > 0:28:18What I always found I had to do
0:28:18 > 0:28:20is to tick the right boxes in the expert's minds
0:28:20 > 0:28:23when they come to look at the painting
0:28:23 > 0:28:26or any other work of art, for that matter.
0:28:26 > 0:28:30What are they actually looking for that says it's genuine or it isn't?
0:28:30 > 0:28:35I think if you find out what those triggers are and tick those boxes,
0:28:35 > 0:28:37they go further than most people might imagine -
0:28:37 > 0:28:39even if they're relatively poor works.
0:28:39 > 0:28:42There's one question I've been dreading to ask.
0:28:42 > 0:28:46Shaun admits he faked his first Lowry in the mid-70s.
0:28:46 > 0:28:50Could he be responsible for any of our pictures?
0:28:50 > 0:28:52And just checking, you didn't do any of these?
0:28:52 > 0:28:54No, I've never done any late stuff.
0:28:54 > 0:28:56- Well, that's reassuring, at least. - Hmm.
0:28:58 > 0:29:02I'm relieved and as Sean knows Lowry's work intimately,
0:29:02 > 0:29:06I'm keen to know whether our pictures look real or fake to his eye.
0:29:07 > 0:29:08What do you think?
0:29:10 > 0:29:15- Yeah, I'd have no trouble in saying that that's by Lowry.- OK.
0:29:15 > 0:29:17This is undated Crowd Scene.
0:29:17 > 0:29:19I'm a bit concerned with this area here
0:29:19 > 0:29:22but like I say, it's hard to tell with not the real thing here.
0:29:22 > 0:29:24This looks like it's been painted over with thinners,
0:29:24 > 0:29:26which Lowry never used.
0:29:26 > 0:29:27It looks very thinly painted.
0:29:27 > 0:29:30What about this one? Lady With Dogs.
0:29:31 > 0:29:33Hmm.
0:29:33 > 0:29:36That looks OK to me, to my eye especially, yeah.
0:29:37 > 0:29:40Well, it's not proof but it's very interesting to hear what you think.
0:29:40 > 0:29:41Mmm, of course.
0:29:43 > 0:29:46Shaun's endorsement of Lady With Dogs is heartening,
0:29:46 > 0:29:50so Bendor is chasing down the final piece of evidence we need
0:29:50 > 0:29:54for it to be accepted as a genuine work by LS Lowry.
0:29:57 > 0:30:00He's come to the Tate Gallery's underground vaults
0:30:00 > 0:30:03to examine the sales ledgers of the Lefevre gallery,
0:30:03 > 0:30:06whose label appears on the back of Steve's picture.
0:30:07 > 0:30:11These photographic ledgers were compiled by the Lefevre Gallery
0:30:11 > 0:30:14to record all the Lowrys that they ever sold.
0:30:14 > 0:30:18If we're going to back up the claim that one of Stephen's pictures
0:30:18 > 0:30:21was sold through the Lefevre Gallery, we need to find it in these ledgers.
0:30:23 > 0:30:26The key piece of evidence is that stock number,
0:30:26 > 0:30:29boldly written on the back.
0:30:29 > 0:30:32What we need to do is match up the stock number on the back
0:30:32 > 0:30:36of Stephen's picture, X9101, to one of the numbers in here.
0:30:36 > 0:30:39Now, that X is quite an important number because the X numbers
0:30:39 > 0:30:43denoted paintings that were bought from Lowry himself.
0:30:48 > 0:30:53That is the picture that sold at auction for £60,000, X9102.
0:30:54 > 0:30:58Here we are. Recognise that.
0:30:59 > 0:31:03Fantastic, here it is, Steve's painting.
0:31:03 > 0:31:06We had just better check it is the same painting,
0:31:06 > 0:31:12not some dodgy copy, and I think there can be absolutely no doubt
0:31:12 > 0:31:15at all that we've got one of Steve's paintings here.
0:31:17 > 0:31:19It feels now that we could have done enough to prove
0:31:19 > 0:31:22that Lady with Dogs is a genuine work,
0:31:22 > 0:31:25so we're all getting together to take stock.
0:31:25 > 0:31:29That's so encouraging to find Lady with Dogs in the Lefevre ledger.
0:31:29 > 0:31:31In terms of getting the paper trail all the way back
0:31:31 > 0:31:36from the painting to Lowry himself, it doesn't get much better than that.
0:31:36 > 0:31:39I think it makes the picture almost a dead cert, doesn't it?
0:31:39 > 0:31:42You're so buoyant, I hesitate to cast a shadow over proceedings,
0:31:42 > 0:31:45but I've just heard from the Lefevre Gallery and they have another ledger
0:31:45 > 0:31:50which records what paintings they sold, when, and to whom.
0:31:50 > 0:31:53The only problem is, they want to keep client details confidential
0:31:53 > 0:31:55and they won't show it to me.
0:31:55 > 0:31:57What they have done is given a little bit of information from it
0:31:57 > 0:31:59and they're saying Lowry's painting,
0:31:59 > 0:32:02Lady with Dogs was sold in July 1972,
0:32:02 > 0:32:05which is a really good date for us.
0:32:05 > 0:32:09That's pretty much the year that Steve recalls his father buying it.
0:32:09 > 0:32:12I know but this is where the problem arises because Lefevre,
0:32:12 > 0:32:14they won't tell us who did buy the painting,
0:32:14 > 0:32:16but what they will tell us is it was not Gerald Ames.
0:32:16 > 0:32:19It wasn't Steve's dad who bought it in 1972.
0:32:19 > 0:32:23So could it be that whoever bought it from Lefevre then sold to Gerald?
0:32:23 > 0:32:26We've clearly got to work out how Gerald got hold of it
0:32:26 > 0:32:29and what Lefevre say is that the person who bought it,
0:32:29 > 0:32:32this mystery buyer, was not an art dealer or agent
0:32:32 > 0:32:34so wouldn't have sold it on in that way.
0:32:34 > 0:32:38Someone connected to the gallery and therefore
0:32:38 > 0:32:40if they had decided to sell the painting,
0:32:40 > 0:32:43would almost certainly have sold it through Lefevre
0:32:43 > 0:32:45so Lefevre would have known about it, but they don't.
0:32:45 > 0:32:47They have no record of it
0:32:47 > 0:32:49and they won't tell us who the mystery buyer is.
0:32:49 > 0:32:51I suppose the other option is that it's stolen.
0:32:51 > 0:32:54I have come across a couple of stories in papers
0:32:54 > 0:32:58from the 1970s about works by Lowry being stolen,
0:32:58 > 0:33:02but then I checked it in something called the Art Loss Register,
0:33:02 > 0:33:05which is the first place you would look for a record
0:33:05 > 0:33:08of a stolen painting, and Steve's pictures are not on that.
0:33:08 > 0:33:11We're obviously going to have to tell Steve about this development.
0:33:11 > 0:33:15Yes, and it's very unfortunate because the art world hates a gap
0:33:15 > 0:33:18in the provenance for a 20th-century picture like that.
0:33:18 > 0:33:21What we have to try and establish
0:33:21 > 0:33:25is Steve's father's credibility as a buyer of Lowry.
0:33:25 > 0:33:29What we need to do is get closer to the early history of this painting.
0:33:32 > 0:33:35Our investigation has taken an unexpected turn.
0:33:37 > 0:33:40The provenance chain that we had hoped to establish from Lowry
0:33:40 > 0:33:44and Lefevre to Steve's father Gerald Ames has been broken.
0:33:45 > 0:33:49It's the kind of anomaly that will make Lowry experts very wary...
0:33:50 > 0:33:53..so it's vital we find evidence that Gerald had
0:33:53 > 0:33:56the paintings in the early '70s.
0:33:56 > 0:33:59We're interrupting Steve's holiday to update him.
0:34:01 > 0:34:04Steve, we have spoken to the Lefevre gallery, as you would expect,
0:34:04 > 0:34:08to try and find out, to get the paper trail
0:34:08 > 0:34:13- of your father buying the painting from Lefevre.- Right.
0:34:13 > 0:34:17What we've got now is a break
0:34:17 > 0:34:20between the painting being at the Lefevre Gallery
0:34:20 > 0:34:22- and it ending up with your dad. - Right.
0:34:23 > 0:34:29What I think we need to prove is that your father held these things,
0:34:29 > 0:34:33so it's not just a receipt, and I realise that might be impossible
0:34:33 > 0:34:36to get hold of, but just some evidence
0:34:36 > 0:34:38that he had them in the '70s.
0:34:38 > 0:34:41That would be very helpful because it would allow us
0:34:41 > 0:34:43to complete that paper trail.
0:34:43 > 0:34:47He definitely had them in the '70s, I know that.
0:34:49 > 0:34:50Insurance documents?
0:34:50 > 0:34:52Insurance documents might be the best.
0:34:52 > 0:34:55Or friends who remember it being on the wall at the time,
0:34:55 > 0:34:58any photographs of it hanging up?
0:34:58 > 0:35:01We just need to start looking in different directions now, Steve.
0:35:01 > 0:35:04- You'll have to leave it with me. - Of course.
0:35:04 > 0:35:08It's a setback but we've got other avenues to pursue now.
0:35:08 > 0:35:12It is funny because that is the one that I thought would be
0:35:12 > 0:35:14- the easiest one.- So did we.
0:35:16 > 0:35:19It's vital that Steve turns up some evidence to show
0:35:19 > 0:35:21that his father owned Lady with Dogs.
0:35:21 > 0:35:24The alarming lack of provenance on Steve's other pictures,
0:35:24 > 0:35:29Crowd Scene and Darby and Joan, makes it more important than ever
0:35:29 > 0:35:34to prove there's nothing abnormal about the pigments the artist used.
0:35:34 > 0:35:36I've returned to see Libby Sheldon, our expert
0:35:36 > 0:35:38and scientific analysis of paintings.
0:35:41 > 0:35:44Libby, it's great to be back, how have you been getting on?
0:35:44 > 0:35:47Well, I've taken some samples, as you know,
0:35:47 > 0:35:50and some very interesting information has come up.
0:35:50 > 0:35:53Libby has been comparing microscopic fragments of paint
0:35:53 > 0:35:58from Steve's pictures with samples of the five Winsor & Newton pigments
0:35:58 > 0:36:00Lowry is known to have used -
0:36:00 > 0:36:02Flake White,
0:36:02 > 0:36:04Ivory Black,
0:36:04 > 0:36:05Scarlet Vermillion,
0:36:05 > 0:36:07Prussian Blue
0:36:07 > 0:36:08and Yellow Ochre.
0:36:09 > 0:36:13These two paintings have the five pigments in them
0:36:13 > 0:36:18and they're very close together in terms of the types of white,
0:36:18 > 0:36:20the types of vermillion and so on.
0:36:20 > 0:36:25We've got a little bit of Prussian Blue there and with the white,
0:36:25 > 0:36:30it's even more exciting because the Winsor & Newton Lead White
0:36:30 > 0:36:33has these very bright particles in it.
0:36:33 > 0:36:39It's really something quite distinctive amongst lead whites.
0:36:40 > 0:36:45Here you see these extraordinary jewel-like fish almost,
0:36:45 > 0:36:49fish-shaped, floating around in the lead white.
0:36:49 > 0:36:52So it's not conclusive but at least there's no shocking
0:36:52 > 0:36:56- revelations at the stage? - No, and very encouraging, I think.
0:36:56 > 0:36:59It's reassuring to know that Libby has only found
0:36:59 > 0:37:03evidence of those exclusive five pigments Lowry favoured
0:37:03 > 0:37:06in Crowd Scene and Lady with Dogs.
0:37:06 > 0:37:09But her tests have revealed something highly unusual
0:37:09 > 0:37:14about Darby and Joan, and it could put its authenticity in doubt.
0:37:14 > 0:37:17Now this painting, I found disturbingly different.
0:37:17 > 0:37:22It's got a white with it that is not lead white.
0:37:22 > 0:37:28It is throughout the painting, so it makes the paint seem very different.
0:37:28 > 0:37:31So we're dealing with a rogue pigment?
0:37:31 > 0:37:35Well, possibly a rogue painting.
0:37:37 > 0:37:40With the fate of Darby and Joan hanging in the balance,
0:37:40 > 0:37:44we need to find out as much as we can about that unusual white
0:37:44 > 0:37:48- pigment that Libby has detected. Hello, Rachel.- Hello.
0:37:48 > 0:37:52We've come to the physics department of Kings College, London
0:37:52 > 0:37:53to meet Rachel Grout.
0:37:54 > 0:37:57She is going to examine the paint sample
0:37:57 > 0:37:59under a scanning electron microscope.
0:38:00 > 0:38:05It's up on the screen now. We're about to acquire the spectrum...
0:38:05 > 0:38:07to see what the elements are.
0:38:07 > 0:38:11Using x-ray analysis, she will be able to identify the individual
0:38:11 > 0:38:14chemical elements and thus reveal the type of pigment used.
0:38:15 > 0:38:19So the graph beneath will give us an indication of what it is?
0:38:19 > 0:38:22Yeah, we're getting some very clear peaks for zinc
0:38:22 > 0:38:24coming up on the spectrum.
0:38:24 > 0:38:26It looks to be fairly pure.
0:38:26 > 0:38:31- So this is zinc white?- I think so.
0:38:31 > 0:38:33Libby, what does that mean?
0:38:33 > 0:38:37This is extraordinary, absolutely extraordinary,
0:38:37 > 0:38:41to have zinc in the upper layer, you might just get that
0:38:41 > 0:38:45but in the lower layer, that is a crazy thing to use.
0:38:45 > 0:38:53It dries so slowly, it cracks, it is translucent.
0:38:53 > 0:38:55It occurs to me that it could be by a faker.
0:38:57 > 0:39:00This could be the end of the road for Darby and Joan,
0:39:00 > 0:39:02unless we can find out if Lowry was secretly
0:39:02 > 0:39:05trying out unorthodox paints.
0:39:08 > 0:39:12Well, there is some suggestion in the research that I've been doing
0:39:12 > 0:39:16in that period, exactly in the '50s,
0:39:16 > 0:39:24he was experimenting possibly with titanium white.
0:39:24 > 0:39:27So if he was using that,
0:39:27 > 0:39:30perhaps he might have also tried zinc white at the same time.
0:39:33 > 0:39:35Well, there's a thought.
0:39:35 > 0:39:39The presence of zinc white paint in Darby and Joan
0:39:39 > 0:39:41poses a real conundrum.
0:39:41 > 0:39:44Either the painting is a fake or Lowry lied
0:39:44 > 0:39:48about the fact that he only ever used five colours.
0:39:48 > 0:39:53Could there be more to this simple man than he led us to believe?
0:39:55 > 0:39:58What we've come across today is not necessarily unhelpful.
0:39:58 > 0:40:01Lowry could be economical with the truth.
0:40:01 > 0:40:03He would tell his interviewers sometimes
0:40:03 > 0:40:05what he wanted them to hear,
0:40:05 > 0:40:07or what they wanted to hear,
0:40:07 > 0:40:10and there's also something about the character profile of Lowry
0:40:10 > 0:40:14which fits with someone not wishing to fess up to using complex pigments.
0:40:14 > 0:40:20Our only hope is that we can prove that Lowry was experimenting with
0:40:20 > 0:40:23a range of pigments when he painted Darby and Joan,
0:40:23 > 0:40:26which is signed and dated 1957.
0:40:28 > 0:40:30But how?
0:40:33 > 0:40:35Bendor has begun to dig deeper,
0:40:35 > 0:40:38but with frustratingly little scientific research
0:40:38 > 0:40:39done on Lowry's paintings,
0:40:39 > 0:40:43he's having to look for evidence in less conventional places.
0:40:46 > 0:40:51He's been trawling through photographs of Lowry at work
0:40:51 > 0:40:54and has a lead on an image from 1957...
0:40:54 > 0:40:57precisely when we believe he painted Darby and Joan.
0:40:59 > 0:41:04We've just received this lovely photograph of Lowry in his studio,
0:41:04 > 0:41:06which was taken in 1957.
0:41:06 > 0:41:08It's a very rare colour photograph,
0:41:08 > 0:41:12and 1957 is obviously the date of Darby and Joan.
0:41:12 > 0:41:16And there's lots of paint materials for us to have a look at.
0:41:16 > 0:41:18Are those tubes on the table?
0:41:18 > 0:41:21They are Windsor & Newton paints.
0:41:21 > 0:41:24If we go a little bit closer, we can see...
0:41:24 > 0:41:26Titanium white!
0:41:26 > 0:41:29- It's brilliant! We've outed him. - Bingo!
0:41:29 > 0:41:32So we've caught him red-handed or, if you like, white-handed,
0:41:32 > 0:41:35telling little porkies about the paint that he was using.
0:41:35 > 0:41:39When he says, "I only every use lead white or flake white..."
0:41:39 > 0:41:42There's five...four boxes of titanium white in his studio.
0:41:42 > 0:41:44- Caught out in his own studio. - Fantastic.
0:41:44 > 0:41:48And if we have a little look around this studio...
0:41:48 > 0:41:52we can zoom in on this box here.
0:41:52 > 0:41:55It's a large box, but it's upside down.
0:41:55 > 0:41:57There's a paint label there, which tells us what it is.
0:41:57 > 0:42:00If I flip it upside down and we can zoom in a bit...
0:42:00 > 0:42:02- I don't know if you can... - Zinc white!
0:42:02 > 0:42:05- That says zinc white, doesn't it? - It looks like zinc white.
0:42:05 > 0:42:08- It's certainly white. - He was awash with the stuff.
0:42:08 > 0:42:11I think we could probably focus on this a little bit more
0:42:11 > 0:42:14to be absolutely sure that we're getting this right
0:42:14 > 0:42:16because this is quite ground-breaking stuff.
0:42:16 > 0:42:19We are outing Lowry and saying that he didn't use the pigments
0:42:19 > 0:42:21he only said he used.
0:42:21 > 0:42:26Now, I have copies of a Windsor & Newton catalogue from the period,
0:42:26 > 0:42:28and if you have a look at the bottom, there,
0:42:28 > 0:42:30there's really not many options.
0:42:30 > 0:42:33If you look at all the names of the white,
0:42:33 > 0:42:36it really has to be zinc white because, for example, lead white,
0:42:36 > 0:42:40flake white, is accompanied by a number, number one or number two,
0:42:40 > 0:42:43and we see no number on the end of our box.
0:42:43 > 0:42:45There's various other whites there with much longer names.
0:42:45 > 0:42:48Yes, titanium white, permanent white, cremnitz white,
0:42:48 > 0:42:50and they're all too long, aren't they?
0:42:50 > 0:42:52It's a little zinc word.
0:42:52 > 0:42:53But also, the more I look at it,
0:42:53 > 0:42:55I don't think this is just wishful thinking,
0:42:55 > 0:42:58- that absolutely looks like a zed. - Yes, I think it must be.
0:42:58 > 0:42:59That's brilliant!
0:42:59 > 0:43:02- So, Lowry was a closet zinc white user.- He definitely was, yes.
0:43:02 > 0:43:05- We've outed him.- I wonder what he would've made of this conversation.
0:43:05 > 0:43:08I don't think he would have been too chuffed, actually.
0:43:08 > 0:43:10I think he liked to keep his secrets.
0:43:10 > 0:43:13Finding proof that Lowry used the pigment found in Darby and Joan
0:43:13 > 0:43:16is a relief, but it will still take
0:43:16 > 0:43:20a leap of faith for a Lowry expert to accept it as a genuine work.
0:43:22 > 0:43:25We've got one last throw of the dice in our search for evidence
0:43:25 > 0:43:27in the painting's favour.
0:43:27 > 0:43:30Lowry was at the height of his fame in 1957
0:43:30 > 0:43:34and it wasn't just photographers who were being admitted to his studio.
0:43:38 > 0:43:41'This is a film about a man who became an artist
0:43:41 > 0:43:44'because he missed a train.
0:43:44 > 0:43:46'This happened many years ago.
0:43:46 > 0:43:48'He left the station in a Manchester suburb
0:43:48 > 0:43:52'and started to walk up the Bolton Road, wondering what to do.'
0:43:53 > 0:43:57A BBC TV crew shot a documentary about his life that very year,
0:43:57 > 0:44:01and Steve and I have come to a cinema in Manchester to watch it
0:44:01 > 0:44:03on the original reels.
0:44:05 > 0:44:08'What was there in the sooty streets to make Lowry wish to
0:44:08 > 0:44:11'spend his life amongst them,
0:44:11 > 0:44:14'painting a world in which other people could see no beauty?'
0:44:14 > 0:44:17Could there be anything in this snapshot of Lowry's life
0:44:17 > 0:44:19to help Steve's cause?
0:44:19 > 0:44:25'Now, Lowry begins and as time goes by, he tells us how he works.
0:44:25 > 0:44:27'I start on an empty canvas...
0:44:28 > 0:44:32'..and prefer to paint from my mind's eye,
0:44:32 > 0:44:35'and suggest something,
0:44:35 > 0:44:37'call it a chimney or church,
0:44:37 > 0:44:39'or anything else.
0:44:40 > 0:44:43'Going along slowly
0:44:43 > 0:44:47'and adding things, and in a strange sort of a way,
0:44:47 > 0:44:50'it seems to come.'
0:44:50 > 0:44:54As we watched Lowry at work, Steve glimpses something extraordinary.
0:44:54 > 0:44:58There they are, look! That's it. That's them.
0:44:58 > 0:45:03There, in Lowry's studio, sitting on the mantelpiece, Darby and Joan.
0:45:03 > 0:45:04That was them.
0:45:04 > 0:45:07It certainly looked like them.
0:45:07 > 0:45:10- It...- Hold your horses just for a minute.
0:45:10 > 0:45:12- It certainly looked like them. - That was it.
0:45:12 > 0:45:15I think it was. There they are again.
0:45:15 > 0:45:19That's the painting, without a doubt. That's it.
0:45:19 > 0:45:21- That's... There it is.- Oh, my God.
0:45:21 > 0:45:23That's it.
0:45:23 > 0:45:26Weird, seeing it there.
0:45:26 > 0:45:30- Has your one got a signature on? The front?- Yeah, I think so.
0:45:30 > 0:45:33And this one hasn't. But of course, he could have done that afterwards.
0:45:33 > 0:45:35It's not finished, though, is it?
0:45:35 > 0:45:37Wow. Here is...
0:45:37 > 0:45:41- If it's not your painting, it's very like your painting.- Hmm.
0:45:43 > 0:45:47- In Lowry's studio. - Amazing that it's on the film.
0:45:47 > 0:45:50Absolutely a stroke of luck, really.
0:45:50 > 0:45:53Finding Darby and Joan in Lowry's very studio
0:45:53 > 0:45:55is an incredible breakthrough,
0:45:55 > 0:45:59but I want to be sure there's no doubt that Steve's picture is
0:45:59 > 0:46:01one and the same painting.
0:46:03 > 0:46:07We need to compare a still frame from the film with Steve's picture.
0:46:09 > 0:46:11What we've done is had a high-resolution scan
0:46:11 > 0:46:15made of that painting, and we're trying to compare the high-res scan
0:46:15 > 0:46:19of this - so, this is from Lowry's studio, and this is Steve's picture.
0:46:19 > 0:46:21You can see some similarities.
0:46:21 > 0:46:23So look at the bottom of Darby's foot,
0:46:23 > 0:46:25that little white patch.
0:46:25 > 0:46:27And there it is on Steve's picture.
0:46:27 > 0:46:30There's a kind of curl of paint round here,
0:46:30 > 0:46:35not that distinct in this scan, much clearer here, in Steve's picture.
0:46:35 > 0:46:37Look at that.
0:46:37 > 0:46:38One thing that is different -
0:46:38 > 0:46:41Steve's picture has a black line here,
0:46:41 > 0:46:44coming down from Darby's walking stick here.
0:46:44 > 0:46:47That's not in the 1957 studio picture.
0:46:47 > 0:46:49But having looked at Steve's picture,
0:46:49 > 0:46:50that's just a crack in the panel.
0:46:50 > 0:46:52There is nothing surprising about that.
0:46:52 > 0:46:55And what we've got to remember here is the technology.
0:46:55 > 0:46:57I mean, this is a high-resolution scan,
0:46:57 > 0:46:59which is what you need in order to be able to
0:46:59 > 0:47:02recreate all the idiosyncrasies of this painting in this one,
0:47:02 > 0:47:06and, of course, from 1957 to the 1970s, that didn't exist,
0:47:06 > 0:47:09so how could someone have copied it in this level of detail?
0:47:09 > 0:47:11- It's just not possible. - I couldn't agree more.
0:47:11 > 0:47:14And also, that's the technical similarities,
0:47:14 > 0:47:17but there's also an artistic one, a stylistic one.
0:47:17 > 0:47:20Those facial characteristics. I mean, it is almost impossible
0:47:20 > 0:47:25for a copyist or for a forger to perfectly replicate features,
0:47:25 > 0:47:31and both portraits have the same look of comical blandness.
0:47:32 > 0:47:36We feeling increasingly confident that Darby and Joan
0:47:36 > 0:47:39and Lady with Dogs are genuine works by LS Lowry,
0:47:39 > 0:47:41and there's a real chance that will help prove
0:47:41 > 0:47:43that Steve's third picture,
0:47:43 > 0:47:46Crowd Scene, is also authentic.
0:47:46 > 0:47:49We've had X-rays made of all three paintings
0:47:49 > 0:47:53and they reveal remarkable similarities in the brushstrokes.
0:47:53 > 0:47:57Now, notice with the Lady and Dogs on the left, those excitable,
0:47:57 > 0:47:59vigorous strokes in the background.
0:47:59 > 0:48:01They are almost identical in the whole way
0:48:01 > 0:48:05they're applied to the Crowd Scene on the right.
0:48:05 > 0:48:07But then, when you look more closely,
0:48:07 > 0:48:12you can see that there are little black, jagged, cut-out areas,
0:48:12 > 0:48:15possibly to mark the edge of a figure,
0:48:15 > 0:48:19but they do show the same temperament, the same approach.
0:48:19 > 0:48:21Now, given that we think one is by Lowry,
0:48:21 > 0:48:23why shouldn't the other be too?
0:48:23 > 0:48:27Seems like the first bit of good news we've had on the Crowd Scene.
0:48:27 > 0:48:32The x-rays offer a compelling case that Lady with Dogs
0:48:32 > 0:48:37and Crowd Scene were indeed painted by LS Lowry,
0:48:37 > 0:48:40and Libby Sheldon thinks there may be even more evidence
0:48:40 > 0:48:41to support the theory.
0:48:41 > 0:48:43So, what I'm looking at here
0:48:43 > 0:48:46is the signature on Lady with Dogs, which is in Biro.
0:48:46 > 0:48:50Seeing it on the paint here, you can see how smooth it is,
0:48:50 > 0:48:52and what a nice line.
0:48:52 > 0:48:54But he didn't only use it as signature,
0:48:54 > 0:48:57and, very interestingly,
0:48:57 > 0:48:58on this painting,
0:48:58 > 0:49:03we can see that he's used it in and around the figures.
0:49:03 > 0:49:05I'll just bring that into focus...
0:49:05 > 0:49:07Fascinating!
0:49:07 > 0:49:09Biro on the signature, Biro in the figure.
0:49:09 > 0:49:13Is there anything you could tell me about the Biro itself?
0:49:13 > 0:49:18Well, it has very interesting edges to it,
0:49:18 > 0:49:21which I think was early ballpoint pens.
0:49:21 > 0:49:24- Early ballpoint?- Yes. - Lovely. Lovely touch.
0:49:24 > 0:49:28So, it would be a very, very clever faker to notice that.
0:49:28 > 0:49:32Well, now, that's another link between these two pictures.
0:49:32 > 0:49:35One picture, which we think has a very high chance of being Lowry,
0:49:35 > 0:49:38and the other now has the same characteristic,
0:49:38 > 0:49:41- with the use of Biro. We're getting closer.- Yes.
0:49:41 > 0:49:45With evidence mounting in favour of Steve's pictures,
0:49:45 > 0:49:47it's more important than ever
0:49:47 > 0:49:49to show that his father actually owned them.
0:49:49 > 0:49:53With no receipts to back up any of the sales, is there anything
0:49:53 > 0:49:58to prove that Gerald Ames acquired these pictures in the early '70s?
0:49:59 > 0:50:03I've been back to Gerald's flat on the hunt for clues and finally
0:50:03 > 0:50:05find something reassuring -
0:50:05 > 0:50:08an estate agent's brochure from 25 years ago,
0:50:08 > 0:50:13with all three paintings clearly on display in Gerald's living room.
0:50:14 > 0:50:17Steve's also been busy and he's turned up insurance documents
0:50:17 > 0:50:21listing the paintings in the early '80s.
0:50:21 > 0:50:23He has even contacted his father's friends
0:50:23 > 0:50:26and former colleagues in the search for proof
0:50:26 > 0:50:29and he's received a letter from Gerald's former secretary
0:50:29 > 0:50:31stating that she clearly remember seeing the pictures
0:50:31 > 0:50:36on the wall in his house when she visited in the mid-'70s.
0:50:38 > 0:50:42But will everything we've done be enough to convince the art market
0:50:42 > 0:50:46to accept Steve's pictures as genuine works by LS Lowry?
0:50:50 > 0:50:54We've convened our own unique panel of four of the country's
0:50:54 > 0:50:59most prominent Lowry experts to offer the final judgment.
0:50:59 > 0:51:01Martin Summers,
0:51:01 > 0:51:05chairman of the Lefevre Gallery in the 1960s and '70s.
0:51:06 > 0:51:10James Rawlin, former head of modern art at Sotheby's.
0:51:10 > 0:51:14Robin Light, chairman of the Crane Kalman Gallery.
0:51:14 > 0:51:17And Jonathan Horwich of Bonhams auctioneers,
0:51:17 > 0:51:19a world authority on Lowry.
0:51:20 > 0:51:24Would he be prepared to offer Steve's pictures for sale at auction
0:51:24 > 0:51:26as genuine works?
0:51:27 > 0:51:32There is over £200,000 resting on the opinion of these four men.
0:51:38 > 0:51:41And they also hold in their hands the reputation of Steve's father,
0:51:41 > 0:51:44Gerard Ames.
0:51:44 > 0:51:46Will they believe that these are three genuine paintings
0:51:46 > 0:51:50bought by a man with a shrewd eye for English art,
0:51:50 > 0:51:52or are the pictures instead ingenious fakes
0:51:52 > 0:51:57bought by yet another victim of the Lowry forgers?
0:51:57 > 0:52:01Personally, for what it's worth, I think these paintings ARE by Lowry.
0:52:01 > 0:52:05Stylistically, forensically, we've really got to know the artist,
0:52:05 > 0:52:08and you can see in these paintings all the characteristics,
0:52:08 > 0:52:11but we don't have an unbroken provenance.
0:52:11 > 0:52:12We can't take these pictures
0:52:12 > 0:52:15back to the very day that Lowry painted them, if he did,
0:52:15 > 0:52:18and these four experts in the room behind me
0:52:18 > 0:52:21are going to have to come to a conclusion on the basis
0:52:21 > 0:52:24of physical evidence, and the evidence of their eyes.
0:52:24 > 0:52:27Now, we don't normally do it like that with Lowry.
0:52:27 > 0:52:30It really could go either way for Steve.
0:52:41 > 0:52:45When we started looking at these three paintings, I'd hoped,
0:52:45 > 0:52:48because Lowry's obviously a much more modern painter
0:52:48 > 0:52:50than many we've looked at in the past,
0:52:50 > 0:52:53that finding a provenance trail would be a bit more straightforward.
0:52:53 > 0:52:57How wrong I was because that has proved infuriatingly difficult.
0:52:58 > 0:53:02But the physical evidence we found, I have to say, I think anyway,
0:53:02 > 0:53:05is incredibly convincing, particularly with Darby and Joan.
0:53:05 > 0:53:10I cannot think of any other way that Steve's painting could be
0:53:10 > 0:53:13anything other than genuine. It has to be, when we compare it
0:53:13 > 0:53:16to the painting we saw in Lowry's studio.
0:53:16 > 0:53:18I just cannot see how that can be fake.
0:53:18 > 0:53:21Obviously, I'm not making the decision, you know?
0:53:21 > 0:53:22Our committee is. But...
0:53:23 > 0:53:25They've got to be right.
0:53:25 > 0:53:27I really think they've got to be right.
0:53:29 > 0:53:31After several hours of deliberation,
0:53:31 > 0:53:35our Lowry experts are ready to deliver their verdict.
0:53:47 > 0:53:50So, Jonathan, speaking on behalf of the panel,
0:53:50 > 0:53:52- have you reached a verdict? - Yes, we have.
0:53:52 > 0:53:56Starting with the Lady with Dogs, what is your conclusion?
0:53:56 > 0:53:58Well, Philip, we discussed this one.
0:53:58 > 0:54:01It is the one with the most evidence behind it.
0:54:01 > 0:54:05It's perhaps one of our favourites,
0:54:05 > 0:54:08but we are all unanimous that we think this is by Lowry.
0:54:10 > 0:54:12Great. That's one.
0:54:14 > 0:54:17And Darby and Joan? What was your conclusion about this one?
0:54:17 > 0:54:20Well, we deliberated. We liked the picture very much.
0:54:20 > 0:54:24It's a little unusual, in terms of the format and the support it's on,
0:54:24 > 0:54:29but we were all agreed, finally, that this was a work by LS Lowry.
0:54:31 > 0:54:32Oh, that's brilliant news.
0:54:32 > 0:54:34What did you make of the fact that we found it
0:54:34 > 0:54:36in that documentary about Lowry and his studio?
0:54:36 > 0:54:39- When we saw that, we couldn't believe it, could we, Steve?- No.
0:54:39 > 0:54:42It's what you might call a slam dunk, isn't it?
0:54:42 > 0:54:45Really, in terms of seeing it there as he's sitting there
0:54:45 > 0:54:48in his own living room painting it. There it is.
0:54:48 > 0:54:54It just adds to our belief that it's a perfectly 100% genuine work.
0:54:54 > 0:54:57And just to be clear, speaking as a professional auctioneer,
0:54:57 > 0:54:59- that is how you would catalogue it? - Absolutely.
0:54:59 > 0:55:00I have no doubt whatsoever.
0:55:00 > 0:55:03Now let's move on to the Crowd Scene.
0:55:03 > 0:55:07Well, this is the one that we've deliberated over for longer,
0:55:07 > 0:55:11and discussed it perhaps in a more robust way than the other two,
0:55:11 > 0:55:14I think, not that it's contentious but there's less to say,
0:55:14 > 0:55:18so it's what we think of it in seeing it,
0:55:18 > 0:55:20where it has been for the last few years.
0:55:20 > 0:55:24It's tested us but, on balance, we feel that,
0:55:24 > 0:55:28- again, like other two, it is 100% genuine.- Oh-ho!
0:55:28 > 0:55:32- We have a trio. - That's just amazing news.
0:55:36 > 0:55:37Steve, what do you think?
0:55:37 > 0:55:41I'm absolutely... I'm absolutely thrilled and delighted.
0:55:41 > 0:55:44And delighted for my father, really. For Dad.
0:55:44 > 0:55:48It's a tremendous vindication of Gerald Ames,
0:55:48 > 0:55:51a self-made man with a passion for an artist
0:55:51 > 0:55:55whose work captured the world he'd grown up in.
0:55:55 > 0:55:58How he acquired the pictures still remains a mystery,
0:55:58 > 0:56:02but we'd done enough to prove that they are the real thing.
0:56:02 > 0:56:06I'm absolutely delighted, is this short and simple answer.
0:56:06 > 0:56:13- And your father too?- Yeah. He would be delighted if he could see.
0:56:13 > 0:56:16Can I ask, was your verdict unanimous?
0:56:16 > 0:56:19Yes, it was a unanimous verdict. We all agreed.
0:56:19 > 0:56:24But just as importantly, our investigation has given us
0:56:24 > 0:56:28an unexpected glimpse behind Lowry's carefully cultivated persona
0:56:28 > 0:56:30of the simple man
0:56:30 > 0:56:34to reveal an altogether more complex and intriguing artist.
0:56:34 > 0:56:38Wasn't it good seeing Steve just now so flushed with excitement?
0:56:38 > 0:56:41But it's not just Steve that can afford to be excited
0:56:41 > 0:56:44because I feel we've made real progress.
0:56:44 > 0:56:46I mean, I know so much more about Lowry.
0:56:46 > 0:56:48Also, Lowry liked to create myths around himself.
0:56:48 > 0:56:50Take the story about the five pigments,
0:56:50 > 0:56:52he only uses five pigments,
0:56:52 > 0:56:55and that is reproduced in most of the literature about Lowry.
0:56:55 > 0:56:58We now know that isn't true. We've outed him.
0:56:58 > 0:57:01And we've taken connoisseurship of Lowry
0:57:01 > 0:57:04a significant step further, so it's not just a victory,
0:57:04 > 0:57:05a significant victory,
0:57:05 > 0:57:10for Stephen, but actually it's a victory for Lowry as well.
0:57:10 > 0:57:13Perhaps it's time to take a fresh look at LS Lowry,
0:57:13 > 0:57:17the artist who captured the drama of a crowded northern street,
0:57:17 > 0:57:20the quirky characters of an old couple
0:57:20 > 0:57:23and the enigmatic stylishness of a lady out walking her dogs.
0:57:25 > 0:57:29If you think you have an undiscovered masterpiece,
0:57:29 > 0:57:31we'd love to hear from you at...