Appraiser Workshops

• Ditch the Bad Habits and Cultivate the Good Ones - an Interview

• Scheduling Time in the Alone Zone

• Frictionless Wrok: How to Clear Your life of Non-Essential Tasks

• Quick and Dirty Guide to: Meetings - How to Make them Work

• Getting Things Done...Faster

• Kanban Changes the Perspective

• Focusing on Getting Things Done with Project management 2.0

• 7 Ways the New Apple iPad will Increase your Productivity

• 10 Laws of Productivity

Artists' moral rights have been enshrined in law for 20 years through the Visual Artists Rights Act, or VARA, which was enacted as an amendment to the U.S. Copyright Code in 1990. VARA prevents the owners of artworks of "recognized stature" from destroying or altering them without the artist's approval. The reason: Unapproved alterations or destruction may damage an artist's reputation. The law establishes mechanisms by which an artist may retrieve a work of art that the owner might otherwise destroy, as well as enables an artist to disclaim ownership of a piece that has been altered. Works of art are also narrowly defined as paintings, drawings or sculptures, as well as graphic and photographic prints in limited editions of 200 or fewer copies.

However, other questions have arisen that were not predicted in 1990. Do artists have the right to stake out where that artwork will be permanently placed? Can artists claim that whatever they make and identify as art has to be treated accordingly? If a damaged artwork undergoes restoration and the artist doesn't like how it was done, can the artist claim the work was "destroyed"?

Back in 1990, it seemed as though the issue was making sure that collectors didn't intentionally damage or destroy significant works that they owned. Those kinds of problems rarely happen, although Mr. Ascalon's Holocaust memorial raises the question of whether making something better actually makes it worse. More often, courtroom judges must reach decisions in cases not necessarily envisioned by lawmakers. Take, for instance, the VARA lawsuit by Swiss installation artist Christoph Buchel against the Massachusetts Museum of Contemporary Art in North Adams.

There’s nothing as stellar on the menu elsewhere. The National Gallery in London has “Venice: Canaletto and His Rivals” (Oct. 13-Jan. 16, 2011), a show that may throw light on the mania of 18th-century British gentlemen for buying views of La Serenissima. At the National Portrait Gallery is an attempt to reassess Thomas Lawrence in “Regency Power and Brilliance” (Oct. 21-Jan. 23, 2011). Lawrence mainly devoted his talents to making early 19th-century Britons, including the obese and corseted George IV, look more glamorous than they were. Does that prevent him from being a great artist? We shall see.

The British Museum has “Journey Through the Afterlife: Ancient Egyptian Book of the Dead” (Nov. 4-March 6, 2011), which is not a major loan show -- many of the exhibits come from the museum’s own collection -- yet may be fascinating. The Courtauld Gallery has one of those niche shows it does well, this time devoted to Cezanne’s Card Players (Oct. 21-Jan. 16, 2011).

On the photography front, there is Eadweard Muybridge at Tate Britain (Sept. 8-Jan. 16, 2011). Another Briton who presented himself as more glamorous than he was -- real name: Edward Muggeridge -- Muybridge emigrated to the U.S., where he took up photography. His greatest fame comes from the pioneering sequences he took of human and animal movement, which were immediate precursors of cinema.

The loose organization of art thievery is illustrated by the case of Bernard Jean Ternus, a French career criminal now sitting in a U.S. jail in Big Spring, Texas, after negotiating with Mr. Wittman and other undercover F.B.I. agents over Champagne on a Miami yacht to sell the Monet and the three other paintings that disappeared in 2007.

The paintings were stolen from Nice’s Museum of Fine Arts by five armed and masked men in jump suits, who were in and out of the galleries in four minutes.

In infiltrating the Nice group — which included the owner of a motorcycle shop and a bulldozer operator who was later arrested — Mr. Wittman also found himself talking with Mr. Ternus and another Frenchman about the availability of two Picasso paintings stolen from the apartment of Picasso’s granddaughter, Diana Widmaier Picasso.

Whether or not Mr. Ternus really had contacts with the gang that stole the Picassos remains unknown, but Mr. Wittman said he received an e-mail with photographs of the stolen paintings posed next to a newspaper dated a week after the theft.

Olivier Baratelli, a French attorney for the Picasso family and also a victim of art theft, said that no one ever demanded a ransom for the two well-known paintings and a Picasso drawing, which have since been recovered. “Frankly, we don’t have explanations, and it all remains a great mystery,” he said.

The thieves were so careful the night of the burglary, he said, that they caused little damage to the paintings except for minor cracks when the works were rolled into tubes.

Ultimately, three middle-aged men — all with ties to the local circuit of flea markets and antique dealing — were arrested when they tried to broker a deal for the painting with a fourth unidentified art expert in a Panama hat. One of the suspects was Abdelatif Redjil, who had gained a measure of fame earlier when he claimed to be the first person to comfort the dying Princess Diana after her car crash a short walk away from the Museum of Modern Art.

To further complicate matters, there's a possibility--though as the year wears on it seems increasingly remote--that Congress will restore the tax retroactively with the same $3.5 million exemption and 45% top rate that existed in 2009. Past court cases suggest that is perfectly legal. But some people with a lot at stake have argued that a retroactive tax is unconstitutional and threatened lawsuits. With the prospect of litigation looming, any legislation that takes effect in 2010 would almost certainly need to offer a choice for heirs of people who die this year: Pay estate tax, or use the modified carryover basis system that's in effect while there is no estate tax.

Whether heirs are stuck with carryover basis, or wind up with a choice for 2010 and elect to use the carryover basis/no estate tax option, inheritors and their advisers need to take the following steps.

1. Have assets appraised.

As in past years, unless the date of death value of a costly asset is obvious (as it is, for example, for marketable securities), you will need to get an appraisal.

If estate tax is an issue, you use this information to figure the total value of the estate, and then apply exemptions and deductions. For instance, you subtract charitable bequests from the total. There is also an unlimited marital deduction for assets passing to a citizen spouse, either outright or through certain kinds of trusts.

Under a modified carryover basis system, you use date of death values for a different purpose. Subject to certain limitations, if an asset is worth more when someone dies than she paid for it, her estate can apply the $1.3 million basis allowance to the difference. Once this allowance is used up, there might be income tax, but it's not triggered--meaning it doesn't have to be paid--until the asset is sold (a common misconception). At that point the total amount subject to tax would consist of the difference between the date of death value and the basis allowance, plus any appreciation after the date of death.

• The appraiser has complete control over the layout and format of the report. Since a word processor allows the writer to place anything anywhere on a page, the appraiser can create a custom appraisal report layout for each and every object in the appraisal.

• Word processors are easy to use and easy to learn and require little technical knowledge to begin creating documents and reports.

• Word processors are “what you see is what you get.” This allows the appraiser to view how the report will look as they create the report.

The cons to using a word processing program include:

• Providing consecutive object numbering may be time consuming. For example, if an appraiser enters 200 objects numbered 1-200 in a word processing document, and then notices the need to remove object number 52, the appraiser must manually renumber every object after number 52 so as not to have skipped numbers in the report.

• Images may be difficult to manage and insert into the word processing document. When an appraiser inserts images into a word processing document, the word processor will push everything below that image down to accommodate for the space needed for the image. This can cause objects after the image to drop to the next page, be split across pages, or cause blank pages. The appraiser must spend time adjusting the image size to make everything fit properly.

• Total valuation calculations must be done manually. The appraiser must use a calculator or adding machine to add up the valuations for each object in order to get a total valuation for the appraisal report.  I talked to one appraiser that told me that he would call out the values and his partner would add them up. He said they did this multiple times to make sure the totals were correct and every time they ended up with a floor full of adding machine paper to wade through.

We tested five sites where a single appraisal costs up to $20 and takes one to eight days to complete. The items appraised were a pair of vintage diamond and black onyx earrings bought in the 1940s, a 19th century gilded Meissen porcelain bowl bought in 1947 at the State Hermitage Museum in St. Petersburg, Russia, and a vintage Olivetti Valentine typewriter. Each appraisal included its estimated value as well as additional information about our items, such as history and care instructions.

In most instances, we uploaded detailed photos of three items to the website and included information we had available for each object. Appraisal results were mixed. For example, auction values for the earrings varied by as much as $625. "You could ask five appraisers [for] five values and get 15 answers," says Leon Castner, director of education at the International Society of Appraisers and a partner in an appraisal firm in Hope, N.J. He examined our photos and then vetted the other five appraisals that we received.

Mr. Castner points out that it's important to understand what type of value is listed in the quote. An auction or fair market value, for example, is significantly higher than quick sale value, which is what an item would yield at a pawn shop, he says.

"Over the last five or six years we've dealt with more and more corporate as well as private clients," said Saul Ingram, head of European corporate art services at Sotheby's auction house.

"Obviously there have been economic changes in the last couple of years, and I think that has heralded a change in attitudes — that these collections need to be trimmed, to focus on quality."

Cathy Elkies, head of private and corporate collections at Christie's, also says she has seen an increase in the corporate side of the business, and expects it to continue.

"In some cases, organizations are editing and refocusing their collections," she said. "Others are looking to completely divest themselves of their art offerings."

Corporations collect art for a variety of reasons, of which turning a profit is often the least important. Some companies like to see supporting emerging artists as a form of corporate social responsibility, or philanthropy — works can be lent to museums and galleries for shows.

Others use art to flaunt their corporate wealth. Fred Goodwin, former chief executive of the once high-flying but now state-owned Royal Bank of Scotland used to boast about the David Hockney in his office.

Sometimes, art is used to enliven the work environment. Half a century ago, industrialist Alexander Orlow adorned the walls of his Turmac tobacco factory in the Netherlands with bright abstract works — inspired by the theme "joie de vivre" — to cheer his workers.

British American Tobacco later acquired the company and closed the factory. In March, BAT sold more than 160 of the artworks at auction for 13.6 million euros.

Which makes this extraordinarily beautiful and precious car we are gazing at even more impressive. Considered by many to be the ultimate expression of the motor car as art form, the auction house which negotiated the sale says the price was 'between $30 and $40 million,' but a charming older woman sitting next to me at cocktails (where Lanson Champagne celebrated its 250th anniversary with a fine pouring) said, "I know the seller's family very well, and the final price was exactly $35 million." The car was one of only three built by Jean Bugatti, son and heir of the legendary Ettore. The prototype 'Aerolithe Electron Coupe' was in the1935 Paris Auto Show; it was then developed further and - radical in design and engineering - used riveted aluminum panels which he mounted on Bugatti's most sophisticated, powerful and revolutionary Type 57S chassis. This one (chassis #57374) was sold to Lord Victor Rothschild of London, who ordered it in light blue with a dark blue interior. In 1939 he sent it back to the factory to have a supercharger installed. The only other example remaining is in the collection of designer Raph Lauren.