![]() |
|
![]() |
#1 | |
Member
Join Date: Aug 2007
Location: Germany, Dortmund
Posts: 9,165
|
![]() Quote:
![]() |
|
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
#2 |
EAAF Staff
Join Date: Dec 2004
Location: Louisville, KY
Posts: 7,272
|
![]()
Since my name has been mentioned several times, I would like to way in a little.
It is always a difficult issue to restore a piece or not. Some recreation is involved, although what I do is based on research on the tribal art patterns, other tribal pieces, the time period of development, etc. I guess a bigger question is how much restoration? I figure that radical restoration that either involves replacing half the original work could be called reconstruction, or if it means swapping/cobbling pieces together then it could be called a monstrosity. I would not apply this to newly made pieces. This particular piece in question seems to be on the borderline, especially since this involves the soul of the piece - the blade. It would require more than just replacing lost inlay. |
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
|
|