And what about these? Cupid putti paintings - Need Help, please

I thought these (there are two) were decorative and somewhat vintage at first (just based on the labels). They are 10x12. De Ville galleries is no longer in operation and advertised as late as 1992.

1. Hadn't seen this texture of craquelure before - it's very difficult to see any real brush stroke. Then I noticed the signature (on one), so I posted.

2. I was looking at the backs and the dark stain looked faked - it's a little lighter up under the top of the frame, as if it was sprayed. It's easily scratched off with a fingernail.

I gently pushed down to see if it went all the way under the frame. That's when I found out it is also EXTREMELY brittle and dry --- and poked a hole in it, so please tell me it's fake

I really was gentle, I promise

 

My guess would be that it's a real painting, but not an old one. And that is a guess. It looks to me like the kind of texture you get from a heavily applied layer of fairly liquid paint and I'm thinking it might be an antiquing technique, an attempt to make the painting look old. Can't be sure though. Don't know what to make of the brittle canvas. I can't see any advantage to making the canvas brittle.

 

Thanks More
I agree on all... But the canvas broke almost like paper - like it never had any flexibility at all.
I do think the back color is applied, since it's so easily scraped off.
It's too bad - even though they're not to my taste - they made a really nice,sellable set.
Now i have to tell my boss...

 

Well, you start that conversation with "Thank goodness I found out about these BEFORE we sold them and had a disappointed buyer."