I have made two comments (below) that it has pained me to post, because my comments on YouTube are unremittingly upbeat. If a work is admirable, I will be the first to say so. If someone's observation is unworthy, I will most likely let it pass without so much as a wink. But smacking one of the greatest masters as though he were a paint-by-numbers hack strikes me as injudicious, fatuous, sloppy. Let us stand down from the podium of the pretentious and just give simple thanks for splendid work.
The gentleman reports with some confidence that Vermeer's paintings run in the range of 12 x 16. This is inaccurate. Unless he attended the Dissius auction of 1696, and was made privy to some of the missing paintings, I cannot imagine how he could go on the record with such a statement. The Lacemaker is small; the highly disputed Girl in the Red Hat is tiny (and likely not Vermeer's). Just about every other painting that comes to mind is larger, many significantly so. Good sir, purchase a ruler!
Carping in re Vermeer's use of the camera obscura strikes me in the same way as lodging an objection to the poems of, say, Sharon Olds because they are written on a computer (versus using Shakespeare's assumed quill). The manner of capture is meaningless; try turning a simple tracing into a Vermeer painting and you will quickly see what I mean. The magic is in the brush, and the talent in the hand. Vermeer's touch was unique and Mozartian, magnificent! Those falls of light he achieves? Genius.
@iDraw3G That is ridiculous. A person who paints that way is able to draw. I he or them uses a camera obscura as a help it doesn't mean anyting to me, it's just a help.
Thank you for a very helpful introduction. I must admit your third fact about Vermeer came as completely new to me, but it would explain the unique luminosity of his pictures.
@OCKxx I'm sorry, but I don't believe that for a second.
iDraw3G 3 months ago
I have made two comments (below) that it has pained me to post, because my comments on YouTube are unremittingly upbeat. If a work is admirable, I will be the first to say so. If someone's observation is unworthy, I will most likely let it pass without so much as a wink. But smacking one of the greatest masters as though he were a paint-by-numbers hack strikes me as injudicious, fatuous, sloppy. Let us stand down from the podium of the pretentious and just give simple thanks for splendid work.
blsager 7 months ago 2
The gentleman reports with some confidence that Vermeer's paintings run in the range of 12 x 16. This is inaccurate. Unless he attended the Dissius auction of 1696, and was made privy to some of the missing paintings, I cannot imagine how he could go on the record with such a statement. The Lacemaker is small; the highly disputed Girl in the Red Hat is tiny (and likely not Vermeer's). Just about every other painting that comes to mind is larger, many significantly so. Good sir, purchase a ruler!
blsager 7 months ago
@blsager - We'll check that out and correct the description - thanks for the heads up!
eHow 7 months ago
Carping in re Vermeer's use of the camera obscura strikes me in the same way as lodging an objection to the poems of, say, Sharon Olds because they are written on a computer (versus using Shakespeare's assumed quill). The manner of capture is meaningless; try turning a simple tracing into a Vermeer painting and you will quickly see what I mean. The magic is in the brush, and the talent in the hand. Vermeer's touch was unique and Mozartian, magnificent! Those falls of light he achieves? Genius.
blsager 7 months ago 2
good painter, love him
Re9syr 1 year ago
He didn't know how to draw
iDraw3G 2 years ago
@iDraw3G That is ridiculous. A person who paints that way is able to draw. I he or them uses a camera obscura as a help it doesn't mean anyting to me, it's just a help.
alvaritooooooooo 1 year ago
@alvaritooooooooo You don't get it: If a person is using a camera obscura, then they're not drawing, they're tracing
iDraw3G 1 year ago
@iDraw3G Thanks, i know. Once the traced is done you must to paint, and then there's not to much tricks for it
alvaritooooooooo 1 year ago
the third fact is called Penumbra stage. I think he probably painted before the penumbra some earth colors too.
tonchititito 2 years ago
Thank you for a very helpful introduction. I must admit your third fact about Vermeer came as completely new to me, but it would explain the unique luminosity of his pictures.
JanVermeer2 2 years ago