The Courtauld Galleries, London recently held an amusing exhibition - ‘The Value of Art’ (24 June – 30 August 99) was devised as an art quiz. In a single room the curator Sarah Hyde, exhibited works of art in unlabelled pairs, and asked the question “which one has the higher value?” The answer was not as obvious as it might seem even for the well informed. I spotted a Courtauld lecturer who had popped in after a break in the coffee shop and even he could not resist pulling up the ingenious shutter-box that held the answer to each pairing. It really was a galling experience to see that you were wrong upon occasion and it did make you studiously read the explanations, so often ignored by visitors to exhibitions.
Frequently it was the seemingly less attractive image that carried the higher value as in a pairing of Matisse creations. His crayon lithograph Nue Assisse, chemise de Tulle (1925) was far more appealing than his chalk drawing of what was possibly the same model caught in a frumpy pose (1923) but as the latter was unique, it held the higher price.
Other items compared were quattrocento paintings, Georgian coffee pots, Islamic metalwork, old master drawings by Tiepolo and Rubens, Hogarth prints and sculpture by Gaugin and Degas. At every turn there was that curious little white shutter-box attached to the wall with a big black question mark on it. There was no point in appearing aloof, all-knowing, as the temptation to reach over and see if you had guessed correctly was too great. Everyone did so in the end. It thus became an interactive exhibition.
Sarah Hyde had a serious purpose behind the gimmicks though, as described in the small catalogue “The aim of this exhibition is to investigate the ways in which our responses to works of art are affected by our expectations about their value.”
Once the more valuable work was revealed, did it suddenly appear superior in the viewer's eyes?

In imitation of the Courtauld’s witty idea we present our own Art Value Quiz...below are two 17th century seascapes, which do you think has the higher value?
  The answer will be published on this page 10th September 1999....

(Value of Art - Question was published on ARTnewspaper.com 4th September 1999)

Answer : The painting on the left was given an auction estimate of £15,000 - 25,000 ($24,000 - 40,000) whilst that on the right is considered to be worth some 10 times the amount of the lower figure and was given a pre-auction estimate by Sothebys of £100,000 - 150,000.
Both paintings are quite small, (left) oil on canvas, 36.3 x 43cm and on the (right) oil on panel, 23.7 x 35cm and both were painted by Dutch artists circa 1670. So what makes one worth so much more?

The painting on the left is by Willem van de Velde the Younger (Leiden 1633-1707 London) and is signed with his initials WWV. It also belonged to Victor Rothschild so carries at least one illustrious detail of provenance. Added to this it has always been accepted as an original painting by the artist and is included in the literature on the artist.On the other hand, the painting on the right, whilst still very attractive and beautifully painted has never been universally accepted as an autograph work by van de Velde.  Instead it has been catalogued as "studio of" van de Velde meaning that whilst it is very close to the artist's style  it was probably painted by a pupil in his studio. This painting is unlucky also in that it does have remnants of a WWV signature and was actually published as an autograph work in the past, as recently as 1990. However art historians are competitive and what one says does not necessarily mean that others will agree.