Did Colin Pearson use painted marks?

There's a small winged vase on a well known auction site listed as by Colin, but it has painted marks on the base,
rather than his usual impressed mark(s) on the side.
I hadn't seen other examples of this?
Alan.

I should have added that it looks a very similar finish to my one, except for the base.

I see the pot you mean , looks ok to me , it's small and porcelain so maybe a painted mark would be right for such a piece , I have only seen larger older works in the flesh but imo this is fine , PS the wings are made by pressing sections of wood into soft clay .

I have some of Colin's work in my collection and have handled, bought and sold many more over the years. I don't recall ever seeing painted marks before but, as Ed says, the pot looks OK in the photograph.

All potters forget to impress their seals from time to time and it could well be Colin's way of rectifying that.

Have to say that if I was trying to sell it I would have wanted to give some provenance as well because of the unusual way that it was marked.

Thanks Guys, I guess I'll hold back from bidding because of the uncertainty!

Seller bought 2 in recent auction at Maak. Two of the Pearson items Maak sold this year, 15 Nov & 17 May have painted marks so maybe not so rare after all?

So it's the one bought from Maak for £300 plus commission just a few weeks ago photographed from the other side.

He's not kept it that long has he?

Yes, that's the one - as I can't afford £300 plus I'll pass on this. He said he had bought 2 by Pearson so maybe he's keeping the 'better' one!

The staining near the base on the one he is selling might well look worse in "real life".

Sold for £620 !!!

With that staining that is really a very poor buy but it shows once again that there appears to be a significant number of people out there who will buy from Ebay and nowhere else on the internet.

that's true , it has to be said ebay has the most followers , but the quality lots are elsewhere .