Anybody else see this? What did you think? Was it a Pollock or no?
To be quite honest, as much as I want to say it is, I feel like it's not. The worst thing her forensic friend could have done imo is place samples of this next to a similar painting by Pollock. He was trying to show how similar they were - and they were some what similar obviously, otherwise there would be no controversy at all. But there were consistant differences in each respective sample to actually be used to prove that it wasn't a Pollock. Not to say that that means it wasn't, but it was a mistake to use that in their defense.