A Major Gripe

[ChoiceAntiques]

Reproduction prints on canvas and other reproduction stuff is wrongly listed in the Antiques category, too. For the most part it seems to be just a handful of people doing this. Poorly crafted reproductions of ancient artifacts of all sorts are offered there, much of it highly priced. Doesn't look good for us at all. Can't agree enough that this sort of merchandise is choking off revenue for the site and likely a good amount of it, too.

[ArtisanUK]

Oooh, I'd love to see another category blitz, Gothcina!

There are older reproductions, but I suppose to some extent a lot of these now have increased in value in their own right. And, to be fair they are few and far between ... but maybe having a dateline on repro categories would work?

Choice, I've seen some of the artifacts in antiques, but aren't they being sold as genuine rather than the repro art? One I looked at had the longest write-up I've ever seen, if it did say anything in there about the item being reproduction it would probably have taken a week to find it!

And I also agree that it is just a handful of people doing it. The problem is that if they are seen to be getting away with it then the categories get flooded.
I admit that reproduction oils aren't the money maker they were seven years ago, but you never know what will be new to the scene and then people start jumping on the bandwagon. That's why I think it's important to stop it at the start and then eBid will get a reputation for not being tolerant of such things.
Thing is, a lot of repro is good value for money, and I have no objection to it being listed or folks buying it, simply that it has to be listed correctly so it doesn't do damage to genuine period pieces.

[ChoiceAntiques]

The reproduction prints on canvas are honestly represented but are wrongly placed under the Antiques category so that collectors have to wade through page after page of reproductions before anything genuinely old can be found.

The "ancient" artifacts are just out and out fakes, poor ones at that, and priced at several hundred dollars in some cases. Only a well-heeled novice would ever be likely to purchase any of them, but of course there are a few who do fall victim from time to time.

I just wish we had a major category for Reproductions with subcategories for art, antiques, ancient artifacts, pottery, porcelain, collectibles, toys, etc. under it. Then, if category restrictions were regularly enforced, reproductions of every kind would be placed in just one spot. Bargain hunters who "like the look without the price" could easily find what they are looking for and reproductions would not pass as genuine.

[ArtisanUK]

Just had a quick peek in the antiques section and I can see there are a lot under decorative arts.
Perhaps you are right, if we did dig deeper how many more would be listed under toys, pottery etc.
Maybe a general Reproduction Antique section would be in order ...?
After all, it is not so long ago that repro furniture (plant stands etc) were extremely popular - they had their own market, so it's not as if the public don't want this kind of thing (even if it does come in fits and starts)

My argument orginally for a repro arts section was primarily based on the fact that there could be no confusion as to where such items should be listed, but it is now obvious that this is not limited to the arts section.
Of course with people who list fakes this would not be as easy to prove and therefore not as easy to move them into a reproduction category?

[ToyCrazyUK]

If there was some additional criteria to feed in when listing items in these categories - would that be useful? Don't know much about all the different choices, but here's a general example:

eg

Orginal/Reproduction/Print/Unknown
watercolour/pencil/charcoal etc
Period of item
If repro, period item based on
Artist


Buyers could also filter through any of these choices. I know it won't stop people listing in wrong categories if they really want to, but if any are confused about which is the right category to list in, this could make it easier for them. eBid could automatically assign it to the relevant category according to the details input.

[johnwash1]

Just been having a think about the category issue from the point of view of an ex professional classifier (I was a taxonomist in a previous incarnation).

Kedo, I'm interested in your view -- I have no expertise in this area and my gut reaction to the way ebid categories are organised is that there's a serious problem that will get worse and worse as the site grows. Everything (I believe) is classified using just two levels.

Any thoughts on that?

[ChoiceAntiques]

Artisan, if eBid could develop resources where they had maybe six unbiased, knowledgeable people they could email photos of questionable items to without identifying the offending party in any way, they could get a general overall consensus as to the authenticity of items when reports are challenged and then put the burden back on the offending party to prove authenticity. I suspect there would be an absence of challenges altogether if such a program were established and consistently enforced.

I know it is not easy to make a determination with 100% certainty from an out-of- focus photo taken a distance away and Somersethedge certainly got it right when he said there is not any one person who knows everything there is to know about antiques. But, six or seven people are a whole lot smarter than just one and it is altogether reasonable to ask for subsequent validation of an item's authenticity to protect both the buyer and the site in those few cases where a seller has challenged an item report and later receives a thumbs-down consensus.

I do not pretend to have any special expertise in ancient artifacts, but I have visited enough museum gift shops over the past 50 years to know that the items appearing on this site as "ancient" certainly are not. Those pottery items are not true in color or form and the supposed "crackling" is contrived aging, much like the "new antiques" coming from China.

It is impossible to make an assessment of an unmounted gemstone from a mere photo, but claiming it to be "ancient" does not make it a traditional antique in any sense of the word. It more properly belongs under Loose Gemstones in the Jewelry category.

Stringing a bead, old or new, into a necklace does not make the necklace an antique, either. If that were the case, newly created furniture made from compressed plywood could be construed as antique, too, since it is comprised of wood which is truly old. Such necklaces are articles of jewelry, not antiques.

There is one individual from the U.S. who has opened four different "Antique" stores under four different names who is flooding the site with "ancient" artifacts from a wholesaler - jewelry, pottery, glass and other items - and is also dumping late book editions into the Antiques category as well. All four of these stores combined carry well over 1,000 such items. Most are listed as "rare". They are poor copies at best.

[ArtisanUK]

I think you have a point and there is always the option of asking the seller to prove authenticity rather than ebid having to disprove?

I got a surprise yesterday when browsing the forums as I discovered someone was listing guitars that were imported fakes - now who would have thought it? Yet of course there were folk out there who knew exactly what they were talking about and the items were quickly removed.

Certainly eBid isn't the only site to suffer from possible fakes, but I think when it gets as much publicity as it has been doing then you are bound to get a lot of chancers testing the water - hopefully M&G are listening in;-)

[kedo]

Kedo, I'm interested in your view -- I have no expertise in this area and my gut reaction to the way ebid categories are organised is that there's a serious problem that will get worse and worse as the site grows. Everything (I believe) is classified using just two levels.

Any thoughts on that?

I've got a lot of thoughts but putting them in to any sort of order is a problem.

Now that Art has been separated from antiques I think things are a bit simpler.


As far as I can understand it we’re discussing three separate problems:-

1. Creating organised and appropriate categories to list original items.
2. Accommodating reproductions.
3. Dealing with fakes (can't cope with that one as well so I'll just comment on the first two).


On general principle I think that:-

1. You should move from generic to specific as you 'dig down' into a category i.e. from types of things to specific characteristics of those things eg. ages, styles etc.
2. There should be as few levels as possible (I think that makes sense in terms of the browsing experience of a potential buyer as well as efficiency ie. simplest solutions are usually the best, elegance, Ockham's Razor bla, bla, bla).
3. The system should be designed so that it doesn't force the duplication of categories (e,g. see lamps - allowing a difference between antique lamps and younger 'collectable' lamps leads to two categories in different sections of the site) but it should allow the addition of appropriate lower level categories as things progress. That's related to point 1.


With that in mind and taking it in small steps.

Art Category – Like ArtisanUK, I think the structure is fine i.e. everything moves from generic to specific and there is an appropriate place to list anything (I think?). Thus no real trouble with Problem 1? I think Gothicina's suggestion i.e. add a reproduction category to each sub-category would work well in combating Problem 2.

For example Art/Photographs

ART
/ Photographs
// Antique (pre 1900)
// Modern (1900 to 1989)
// Contemporary (1990 to now)
// Other

Becomes

ART
/ Photographs
// Antique (pre 1900)
// Modern (1900 to 1989)
// Contemporary (1990 to now)
// Reproductions

If that adjustment was introduced and enforced in each category it would solve the problem wouldn’t it? I think….? There is no possible doubt where any type of photograph (or reproduction of a photograph) should go.

Antique Category - .....Actually trying to sort out antiques is driving me a bit mad so I'll sleep on it.

[crazymama]

Crazymama agrees repro's should have their own seperate catagory. The worst that can happen is to think you are buying or bidding on an original and have it arrive and be a repro. Especially if it were sold as a original. Ebid is one up on the other sites in this area, I believe that we can only get better as time goes on. With the forums offering so much information and the great staff of Ebid all will benefit.

Nothing I love more than to come home after a day of work and post item up for bid and read the forums and type a bit in reply.