In order to determine whether or not a work is authentic, there must be a combination of provenance, subjective authentication, and forensic authentication. In the specific case of the Tori Hurton painting which is considered an original Jackson Pollock, the three attributes are not in agreement with each other, but from my perspective it appears that the painting is authentic. Its authenticity is mainly associated with the fingerprint which corresponds to the paint pot as well as the painting. This should be taken as strong evidence that the painting is authentic, but since the origin as well as the timeline of where this painting was located and who owns it is unfounded, people claim that it is not is not authentic. However, it could be that Pollock just gave away his painting, which is how over time it was discovered in the thrift store. There are many ways and paths that would allow the painting to end up in a multitude of places, so the fact that it was obtained at a thrift store should not serve as a determining factor in determining the authenticity of the painting. Just because the painting wasn't in the hands of a wealthy art collector doesn't mean it isn't authentic. Ignoring these notions, many people in the art field, some with extensive experience, establishment and knowledge in the field, have subjectively analyzed the piece and have all come to the same conclusion and determined that the painting does not It wasn't authentic. It is also noted by the International Foundation For Art Research that the painting is not considered authentic due to what appears to be "an intentional splatter pattern when there should be more of a mixture of paint", but this criticism and observation is made anonymously. thus the credibility of the statement diminishes. Additionally, Thomas Hoving dismisses fingerprint evidence and claims that there is no resemblance to Jackson Pollock's heart in the painting. The very demonstration of Thomas Hoving's immediate propensity to reject forensic evidence demonstrates his passive judgment. He continues to cling to his belief that the painting is not authentic without even momentarily considering this notion. This stubbornness seems to be common to countless individuals in the field of art. Furthermore, if the painting was not authentic, then the question of how Jackson Pollock's fingerprint ended up on it should be investigated, but this question is not raised. Forensic authentication contradicts all the above-mentioned evidence due to the unshakable proof of matching fingerprints. The main problem in determining whether the painting is authentic or not is associated with the conflict between subjective authentication and provenance and forensic authentication. However, given that the fingerprint was confirmed by both the laboratory and the sergeant, there should be no doubt about the authenticity of the painting. Their claims are based on scientific and tangible evidence, while other individuals have no similar basis. Say no to plagiarism. Get a tailor-made essay on “Why Violent Video Games Should Not Be Banned”? Get an Original Essay The role of art experts is essential in scenarios where authenticity is questioned. These art institutions along with cultural brokers are the individuals who have the power to present the work with a corresponding priceless or worthless value. In order to “isolate a gallery if we can trace possession of the work from the artist to the owner.