I acquired this lithograph after my parents passed. They were married in 1946, which is when it was given to them as a gift. I am attaching pictures for you to review, hoping this will help with your answer. Thank you.

I believe I have a copy of the same lithograph you describe
Which was a wedding gift for my parents as well in 1938.
It is signed in pencil with #305 and the artist's name.
It depicts a two arched bridge leading into a red roofed estate.
Is this the same as yours?

If I could see a picture of the what you have, I could tell you.

Mine is identical and since it has the same #305 the value is minimal...

I also have an identical print and it is called "Cite Flamande" and I have no information on the artist, Alber Van der Vink.

Whoa, I have the very same signed in pencil. I've had it since 1976. It was from my ex's family. I've been trying for years to find out about it. Anyone else know?

I have two of them, I had them framed and they are hanging in my office.
I have two others as well. I can post pictures if anyone is interested.
Dan

Yes, I'd love to see them.

Curious? Does anyone know the value of this and it's sister picture?

I have the same one, but it is #57.. does this have any value?
please advise [email protected]

My sister has this same picture. Only hers is the oppisite. It is signed with pencil and numbered 113. Do you know if they have any value?

Seems no one has any knowledge to "value" of the Alber van der Vink print. You could scour the auction houses and art reference books to find out if this apparently obscure artist has any sales to his name.

Beautiful paintings though. I have a print different than the one shown above. It is displayed prominently in our dining room above the buffet. I picked it up at a thrift sale for a dollar, so it is worth at least a dollar.

Gordon

I have two other lithographs by the same artist, numbered 113 and 114. They belonged to my grandparents. I can post pictures if anyone is interested.

I would love to see your copies, I just purchased 113 for $20 at Saint Vinny's and would like to know more.

I posted them on the askme website; they are also attached to this answer.

My strictly personal opinion, I am not a professional.. Attached are two images of the prints without the flash from the camera.

Comments based on the cropped image showing the roof edges... The print is of an implausible scene, as well as an architectural oddity. The people, at least three, play on the roofs. A female figure- reclined and stretched out head to the left, along the peak of the leftmost roof. Another young woman is stretched out on the next, gazing down over the front edge. A young man has climbed a chimney on the next roof and appears to gaze at the river. Beneath his feet is a male head with mustache looking at the viewer. Note the far eastern figure in the highest window facing to the right.. . More figures on the roofs and everywhere else...

Comments based on the whole image.. . The perspective is off, the main building seems to stand without foundation. Many symbols that seem far eastern decorate the façades of the buildings. Sea critters decorate the stonework of the bridge. Far eastern figures -male and female, decorate the front of the wall in front of the house on this side of the bridge. One male figure on the right wall below the green fenced area appears Buddha like. Others, mostly children, peer out of most of the windows. Interestingly, much has been obliterated by over-painting, especially on the mentioned wall and the gutter formed by the join of the two roofs crowned by the women.. At an other level one might see that the apparent scroll work/chimney trim depicts human figures in human activity. There is a "w" painted on the side of the bridge that seems to match with the "w" in the penciled signature.

Conclusions based on observation and other comments on this thread:... The signature does not appear in a database of 350000plus listed artists. This usually suggests a fake name for an artist for some reason, probably financial, or very unknown. The "name" given to the image is likely fanciful and designed to appeal to the market in which the image is sold. Either human error or modern copying results in the same x of y print edition number. I suspect the painting's origin is far eastern and the prints signed with a western signature .

Comments added after the two additional images were added to the post.. . Many similarities include women looking out of most of the windows. Here they are in different age groups, all with bun-like hairdos, a take on a Charlie McCarthy like face, a star burst, a costumed figure, hands on knees and shoes pointed at the viewer, sitting on a roof posing as the chimney, two figures kissing compose the leftmost roof edge of the lowest building on the left... many others... On the high roof on the upper left,almost under the mat, is a face sideways at the right end. I believe it is the same face as in the cropped image. Perhaps the artist?

These numerous touches undermine the seriousness of an artistic effort, The purity of intent is sabotaged and a piece of “search and find”entertainment is produced. Perhaps intentionally, for a pre-TV audience. These images are to be enjoyed for their decorative and conversation value.