An Original Painting Attributed To Isis De Lazaro Cubillas 1964

Collectors and appraisers often encounter mid-20th-century Latin American works described as “attributed to” an artist whose name is not widely documented. If you’ve come across an original painting attributed to Isis de Lázaro Cubillas and dated 1964, this guide will help you approach it methodically—balancing connoisseurship, technical examination, provenance building, and market reality.

What “Attributed To” Means—and Why It Matters

Terminology used in cataloging has real consequences for value and confidence:

• By: The work is, in the cataloger’s opinion, by the named artist.
• Signed: The work bears the artist’s signature; authenticity still requires corroboration.
• Attributed to: Probably by the artist, but with some uncertainty due to limited documentation or conflicting indicators.
• Circle of / Workshop of: Produced by an associate or in the artist’s milieu.
• In the manner of / After: Imitative or derivative, not by the artist.

“Attributed to” is not a red flag by itself. It often reflects a cautious, professional stance when documentary evidence is incomplete. Your job is to move the needle—either toward confirmation or toward a more accurate classification—using evidence.

For a 1964 Latin American painting, the evidence often sits in three buckets:

1. The object itself (materials, techniques, inscriptions).
2. Documentary record (provenance, exhibition history, literature).
3. Comparative market and scholarly analysis (related works, stylistic consistency).

Understanding the Name and 1964 Context

The compound name “Isis de Lázaro Cubillas” appears to follow Hispanic naming conventions, where de Lázaro could be a family name and Cubillas a second surname. Artists may sign with:

• Full name (Isis de Lázaro Cubillas)
• A shortened form (Isis de Lázaro; Isis Lázaro; I. de Lázaro)
• Initials (I.D.L.C. or variations)
• A stylized monogram

Documentation on artists with similar names can be uneven in English-language sources. Scarce references do not negate authenticity; they simply mean you must prioritize primary evidence and regional research. In 1964, many Latin American artists—Cuban or diaspora—were working in oil, gouache, or the then-expanding realm of acrylics. Political and economic conditions sometimes affected access to traditional art materials, leading artists to use house paints, industrial enamels, or improvised supports. Expect diversity in mediums and supports from this period.

If the painting claims Cuban origin or a Cuban artist, note:

• Post-1959 cultural institutions in Cuba sometimes applied collection stamps or export control labels to works leaving the country. Absence of such marks does not prove in-country origin or export legality, but any institutional label deserves scrutiny.
• Export/import regulations and sanctions have evolved. Before selling or shipping, verify current legal requirements in your jurisdiction. This guide is not legal advice.

Materials, Signature, and Period Traits to Inspect

A connoisseur’s first pass is visual. A professional appraisal adds measurement, microscopy, and instrumental analysis. Here’s how to structure the examination.

1. Support and Ground

• Canvas: Common weaves include linen and cotton duck. Look for manufacturer selvedge stamps on the tacking edge (often hidden under the frame).
• Panels: Masonite/hardboard and plywood were common; look for factory stamps or edge bevels.
• Ground layer: White or off-white priming is typical; brush-applied gesso vs. commercial acrylic gesso can indicate period. Acrylic gesso is more common post-1960s; not definitive but informative.

2. Medium and Surface

• Oil: Expect slower drying, possible age-appropriate craquelure, and a resin varnish layer that fluoresces greenish under UV.
• Early acrylics: Bocour Magna (solvent-based) and early water-based acrylics circulated in the 1950s–60s. Acrylics can show different UV fluorescence and tend to have more flexible, plastic-like film.
• Mixed media: Economical or improvised materials (enamels, house paint) were used by some artists; smell, gloss, and underlayer interactions can be diagnostic.

3. Signature and Inscriptions

• Placement: Lower right is most common; verso inscriptions may include date, title, place (e.g., Habana/Miami/Madrid), and medium.
• Tooling: A signature cut through dried paint suggests later addition; one executed wet-into-wet is more likely contemporary with creation.
• Pigment/medium match: Signature paint should be consistent with the palette and medium used elsewhere.
• Orthography: Diacritics (Lázaro vs Lazaro) can vary. Compare letterforms across the work (e.g., numerals in the date vs. in the price on a verso label).

4. Construction and Hardware

• Stretcher: Keyed stretchers with wedge slots are common in the 1960s; later replacements can occur. Uneven patina suggests mixed components.
• Nails/staples: Hand tacks vs. staples can help date stretching or re-stretching events.
• Frame: A period frame can be supportive but is never definitive. Framer labels with addresses help place the work geographically and temporally.

5. Age Indicators

• Craquelure: Natural, non-mechanical crackle should be consistent with drying and ground movement; perfectly regular, alligator-like crackle sometimes indicates later distressing or non-artist-applied finishes.
• Varnish: Aged natural resins yellow; synthetic varnishes may remain clearer but still fluoresce under UV.
• Accretions: Dust lines along stretcher bars, oxidation on tacks, and grime patterns can indicate stable age.

6. Instrumental and Forensic Tools

• UV light (Wood’s lamp): Varnish fluorescence, retouching (often dark patches), differences in binding media.
• IR reflectography: Reveals underdrawing in carbon-based media; useful in figurative works.
• X-radiography: Reveals pentimenti, canvas weave, and dense pigments like lead white.
• XRF: Elemental readouts to flag anachronistic pigments; for example, the presence of pigments first commercially available post-1964 warrants caution.

Building Provenance and a Paper Trail

Provenance transforms “attributed to” into “by,” or, at minimum, into a stronger attribution. Aim for an unbroken chain of custody back to the artist or a primary dealer.

• Family and Estate Records: Ask prior owners for bills of sale, letters, photographs of the artwork in situ, or exhibition programs listing the work. Photographs that show dateable interiors help.
• Gallery and Framer Labels: Record every label and stamp (transcribe verbatim). Contact successor galleries where possible. Framer ledgers occasionally survive and can confirm dates.
• Exhibition and Press: Search period newspapers, gallery invitations, and community cultural bulletins in cities with Cuban and Latin American diasporas (e.g., Miami, New York, Mexico City, Madrid). Library vertical files and local archives can be more productive than national databases for lesser-documented artists.
• Artist Networks: If the artist is under-documented, peers, students, or family may provide signature exemplars and recollections. Treat oral histories as leads to corroborate, not as final proof.
• Conservation Reports: A condition report from a qualified conservator is an excellent piece of provenance, timestamping the work’s material state at a given date.

Document everything in a single dossier. Even if no single piece proves authorship, the aggregate can tip the balance.

Valuation: Comparables, Condition, and the Real Market

Price derives from authenticity probability, quality, condition, size, subject, and liquidity.

1. Build the Comparable Set

• Search auction archives for the exact name and plausible variants (Isis de Lázaro; Isis Lázaro; Isis de Lazaro Cubillas; Isis Lazaro). Be open to misspellings and to Spanish diacritics.
• Include “school of,” “attributed to,” and “Latin American, 1960s” as supplemental comparables when direct matches are scarce.
• Note hammer prices, buyer’s premium, size, medium, date, and condition of comparables. Adjust for currency and sale date.

2. Weigh Attribution Risk

• Works cataloged as “by” command the highest prices. “Attributed to” generally sells at a discount of 30–70% relative to secure attributions, depending on market depth and confidence of the cataloger.
• Strong provenance, period framing, and convincing stylistic match can narrow the discount.

3. Condition Adjustments

• Structural issues (canvas tears, panel warping) heavily impact value unless expertly conserved.
• Light to moderate, well-executed inpainting is acceptable in mid-century works, but extensive overpaint or abrasive cleaning reduces value.
• Yellowed varnish is a reversible issue; do not clean pre-sale without a conservator’s advice.

4. Size, Subject, and Medium

• Larger oils typically outperform small works on paper. However, intimate jewel-like pieces with compelling subjects can be exceptions.
• Signature visibility and legibility influence buyer confidence.

5. Venue Strategy

• Regional auction houses with strong Latin American departments can outperform generalist venues for these works.
• Specialist galleries may secure private sales if the attribution can be strengthened.
• For uncertain attributions, transparent cataloging and conservative estimates encourage competitive bidding.

Avoid assigning a price without evidence. If you need a working range for insurance or estate planning, document your assumptions and the discount you applied for attribution uncertainty.

Conservation, Care, and Risk Management

Conservation decisions affect both value and scholarship.

• Don’t clean before you know: Old varnish can hide subtle glazes. Aggressive cleaning permanently alters surfaces and reduces value.
• Use reversible treatments: Conservators prefer reversible consolidants and varnishes so future specialists can undo interventions.
• Environmental control: 18–22°C (64–72°F), 45–55% relative humidity, low UV light. Avoid fireplace mantels and exterior walls in humid climates.
• Framing: Use acid-free backing, a proper spacer, and a sealed dust cover. For works on paper, UV-filtering glazing is advisable; for oils on canvas, glazing is optional but protective.
• Insurance: Insure at replacement value with a schedule that reflects the work’s current attribution status and condition. Update after any scholarly or market developments.

Red Flags and How to Respond

• Anachronistic materials: Pigments or canvas types not available in 1964 demand explanation.
• “Fresh” signatures on otherwise aged paintings: Potential later additions or forged signatures.
• Inconsistent storytelling: Provenance with gaps, shifting narratives, or unverifiable claims.
• Perfect pedigree, no paper: High claims with zero documentation should be scrutinized.

When in doubt, pause. Commission a technical examination and seek independent expertise. A small upfront cost can prevent large downstream losses.

A Practical Checklist

• Identify and record:

  • Exact measurements (image and frame), medium, support, and date as seen.
  • All inscriptions, signatures, labels, and stamps (recto/verso).
  • High-resolution photos under normal, raking, and UV light.

• Compare:

  • Signature letterforms and date numerals across known examples or stylistic peers.
  • Palette, brushwork, and compositional tendencies with period Latin American works.

• Build provenance:

  • Gather bills of sale, exhibition references, framer receipts, and owner affidavits.
  • Contact regional galleries, framers, and archives relevant to the supposed origin.

• Analyze condition:

  • Note craquelure, cupping, tears, losses, previous restorations, and varnish state.
  • Obtain a conservator’s condition report if selling or insuring.

• Value and strategy:

  • Assemble comparables; adjust for medium, size, condition, and attribution level.
  • Choose a sale venue aligned with Latin American art buyers.
  • Be transparent in cataloging; avoid overstating certainty.

• Legal and logistics:

  • Verify export/import rules for cultural property and any sanctions affecting origin.
  • Insure during transit; use professional art shippers.

FAQ

Q: What’s the single most convincing piece of evidence to move from “attributed to” to “by”? A: A combination of a period invoice or exhibition catalog naming the work, plus a technical study showing materials consistent with 1964 and a signature consistent with other verified examples. No single item is perfect; convergence matters.

Q: Should I clean the painting before appraisal or sale? A: No. Have a conservator assess it first. Old varnish and surface soils can be safely removed, but only after testing. Cleaning can alter perceived color and value—sometimes up, sometimes down.

Q: If the artist is little-known, is the piece worthless? A: Not at all. Quality, subject, and period interest can sustain a market even for lesser-documented artists. Strong documentation can materially lift value regardless of name recognition.

Q: How do I handle export if the work is believed to be Cuban from 1964? A: Research current laws in both origin and destination countries, including cultural property rules and sanctions. Obtain permits if required. Consult a customs broker or legal counsel; regulations change.

Q: Does the frame add value? A: A period or artist-selected frame can add modest value and contextual credibility, but frames are rarely decisive. Keep the frame if it bears relevant labels or matches documented exhibition photos.

By approaching an original painting attributed to Isis de Lázaro Cubillas (1964) through careful, evidence-based steps—object study, documentation, comparison, and conservation—you transform uncertainty into informed judgment. Whether the outcome is a confirmed attribution or a refined classification, your diligence will be reflected in both scholarly integrity and market performance.