Short answer: a remote opinion states what the available evidence supports, what remains unverified, and what a change in evidence would do to the range. It is not a substitute for physical examination.
Key points (text version)
- 01 Six views
- 02 Details
- 03 Measurements
- 04 Provenance
- 05 Certificate
1. Five layers
| Layer | Material | Supports |
|---|---|---|
| Six views | Daylight originals | Form and completeness |
| Details | Marks, base, rim, flaws | Technique and repairs |
| Measurements | Size, weight, density | Comparable tier |
| Provenance | Invoices, publications, labels | Market acceptance |
| Certificate | Accredited material testing | Rules out treatment |
Compressed messaging-app images and torch-lit translucency shots are the most common gap. Strong transmitted light is not proof of natural material: treated and dyed stones can look equally luminous.
2. Category checklists
Porcelain: body, glaze, enamel, tooling, mark and foot, with raking-light shots. Jade and jadeite: material certification before visual attribution; archaic jade additionally needs material, tooling, burial alteration and ornament evidence. Painting: provenance, publication and exhibition records usually outweigh a high-resolution brushwork photo, since no unified state authenticity certificate exists. Coins: weight and diameter are more reliable than colour, which lighting and editing distort. Seal stone: skin, radish-like veins, red fissures and density under 20x magnification, plus a consistency check between inscription dates and documented history.
A worked example: a yellow stone seal inscribed with a Qianlong 55th-year date and an imperial hall name. Palace Museum and National Library sources date the relevant seal group to 1784 (with scholarship placing actual carving in 1788), while 1790 corresponds to a different imperial seal. An inscription that conflicts with documented history must be flagged, not repeated as fact.
Key points (text version)
- Porcelain | body glaze mark foot
- Jade | material + certificate
- Painting | provenance
- Coins | weight diameter
- Seal stone | skin veins dating
3. Naming discipline
- A mark is not an attribution. Say 'bearing a Wang Bu mark', not 'by Wang Bu'.
- 'Imperial' is a claim requiring archival or catalogue evidence.
- 'National treasure grade' is marketing copy, not catalogue language.
- 'Date unknown' is professional when no evidence exists.
Article 73 of the revised Cultural Relics Law requires accurate descriptions and prohibits false publicity, which makes naming discipline a compliance matter as well.
4. Five recurring misjudgements
| Case | Appearance | Responsible wording |
|---|---|---|
| Marked porcelain | Resembles a high-priced recorded lot | Note widespread replicas; use 'bearing a mark' |
| Named-ware bowl | Glaze close to a famous kiln | Flag authenticity risk, do not price as genuine |
| Imperial-type seal | Translucent stone, complete inscription | Check chronology and material; avoid 'imperial' |
| Jadeite torch photo | Bright and translucent | Translucency is not proof of untreated material |
| Silver coin group | Golden or copper cast | Flag material doubt; weigh and test |
Key points (text version)
- Mark ≠ attribution
- 'Imperial' needs records
- Marketing superlatives
- Leave undated if no evidence
5. From evidence to a range
- Three to five comparable sales on one basis
- Adjust for condition, provenance, size and sale positioning
- Publish a range with explicit upgrade conditions
- Return an actionable list of missing documents
See the records guide, the fee worked examples and the compliance checklist.
6. FAQ
Can compressed chat photos support a formal conclusion?
No. A remote opinion is provisional and must list what remains to be verified.
Does a torch-lit translucency photo prove untreated jadeite?
No. Treated and dyed material can look equally bright. Obtain an accredited certificate.
Why say 'bearing a mark' rather than the artist's name?
A mark proves only that the mark was written. Replicas with the same mark are common.
Is there an official authenticity certificate for paintings?
No unified state system exists; provenance, publication and exhibition records carry the weight.
Why exclude 'national treasure grade' wording?
It is seller marketing, not a verifiable finding.
Must dimensions be measured?
Yes. They determine comparable tier and support insurance, freight and settlement.
What if an inscription date conflicts with history?
Flag it, use a more cautious name and estimate, and list the sources to check.
Can the estimate change after better evidence arrives?
Yes. A written opinion should state in advance how a certificate or provenance would shift the range.
7. Sources and review
- 《中華人民共和國文物保護法》（2024 年 11 月 8 日第二次修訂）第五章「民間收藏文物」 — 第六十六至七十五條：合法取得方式、禁止買賣範圍、文物拍賣許可、拍賣前審核、如實表述義務、備案與優先購買。
- 雅昌藝術市場監測中心《藝術品拍賣全攻略》與季濤〈不要混淆拍賣場上的各種價格〉 — 定義估價、保留價、起拍價、落槌價、成交價；並指出 2012 年《拍賣術語》行業標準與市場發布習慣存在差異。
- 國家珠寶玉石質量檢驗檢測中心（NGTC）等檢測機構公開職能説明 — 珠寶玉石類可出具材質與處理方式檢測證書；書畫、瓷器、高古玉並無國家統一的「真偽證書」制度。
- 北京拍賣行業協會／雲南省拍賣行業協會〈關於警惕以「拍賣」為名實施詐騙的風險提示〉 — 提示「拍前收費」、虛估天價、冒用知名拍賣行名義，並説明資質核驗渠道。