Quote:
|
Originally Posted by Garth Herrick
Hi Virgil,
The enigma about Vermeer to me is the way he almost foretold photography in his uniquely rendered highlights, diffused as though he were viewing his reference through some lens or camera obscura. Perhaps he was simply wearing some sort of ill fitted spectacle. But at any rate he had a unique, original way of representing luminosity in some of his paintings. This has nothing to do with perspective, however.....
Garth
|
Garth,
That aspect of one or two of Vermeer's paintings is what the advocates of the optical device theories always point to as if it were proof, but all it really is is a clue, and one that can be interpreted in other ways as well. Diffusion of images, or parts of images, is not unique to optical devices. Our own eyes see things that way under certain circumstances.
Vermeer scholar Arthur Wheelock has backed off from asserting that Vermeer worked from camera obscura projections, and now only postulates that he might have looked through some sort of optical device at one time or another and found the effects agreeable enough to inspire him to mimic them in his paintings. This, too, is speculation, however. Hockney has also recently recanted his earlier assertions regarding Old Masters allegedly tracing from projected images, after having been soundly refuted by several scientists, including Dr. David Stork, of Stanford University.
A camera obscura is a dark chamber. That is the literal translation of the term. I want to know how anyone can paint in the darkness and end up with as highly realistic a result as Vermeer's paintings exhibit.
In Vermeer's time, art students learned to draw, and one could not become recognized as a Master by the Guild of St. Luke without demonstrating proficiency at both drawing and painting. The Guild controlled the trade, and only a Master could conduct business as a professional artist and/or art teacher. Vermeer was not only recognized as a Master by the Guild, he was elected to its top position. It is therefore reasonable to surmise on that basis that Vermeer could draw very well. Artists who can draw very well do not need to trace from projected images. I have no trouble attributing excellent results to extraordinary talent alone.
Vermeer was a Master. He exhibited a superior understanding of the principle of selective focus in his paintings, equalled only by Rembrandt a generation earlier. That understanding is sufficient to explain the optical phenomena in question, in my estimation. There may well have been a connection between Rembrandt and Vermeer through Carel Fabritius. Fabritius had studied with Rembrandt, and subsequently lived in Delft.
Virgil Elliott
Threaded Mode
