1960s oil painting

Originally bought, apparently, from one of the artists that sell their work on a Sunday along the Hyde Park railings in London. I just liked the colours and the sheer 60'sness of it - I bought it from the Bay of Fleas. It's an oil on board, signed with what looks like 'SEE' and in it's original frame. Any ideas anyone?

*click to enlarge*

I don't know of the painter but the framing was done at Boots I think.

LOL yeah - Paul wants to re-frame it but I like it, it's got a thin strip of hessian in it!

very 1960's I have one with a thin strip of velvet.

according to the building, the ships and the doorgate I would say its somewhere made in the far east , probably Japan.
Think it's a mass production, made for big department stores. Don't think you will find any information on the painter.

I have to disagree there Fritz - it's an original oil on board painting - the artist has used a palette knife, it's very thick and textured in places - definitely not a mass produced print.

There were lots of artists selling their paintings by Hyde Park - I used to see them as a kid passing in the car on a Sunday (we used to go to a lot of restaurants and museums in central London during the 1960s and 70s). But I don't suspect it's anybody well-known particularly.

I bought this one not long ago.Signed and dated 1968.
They both seem to have that 60's abstract nautical look to them.Quite retro I think.

Hi Snacky - very nice - can you read what the signature says?

R Palmer
1968

I am no expert, but from looking at it I have roughly the same opinion as Frillo.

I belive he means a mass produced painting.

I have seem alot vaguely simular to this and many other "in the sytle of" paintings of boats etc, most have the same overly textured and over bright feeling to them, quite often signed with a short name, often in red.

Ah OK - well yes it might well be a mass-produced piece, I think I already kind of alluded to that earlier however it's definitely a painting and not a print (I studied History of Art and quite frankly if I couldn't tell an oil painting from a print then it would all have been an utter waste of time!).

The paintings sold along the Hyde Park railings were there primarily for the tourists - I do appreciate that. However to describe it as a mass produced print (along the lines of Tretchikoff or Shabner) is incorrect because it *is* an original painting.

Nobody thinks it's a print pip

:D

On the subjest of prints (not related to your painting) it's unbelivable the legnths people will go to make a print look like a painting "painting varnish over a print to give texture etc) or how much a watercolour can seem to be a print.

At a fine art auction I bought a lot of 9 "prints" of which 8 were orignal paintings. All (except the print) now hanging on my walls :)