WMcD Posted February 18, 2014 Share Posted February 18, 2014 I saw it last weekend and recommend it. The website provides information. http://www.sonyclassics.com/timsvermeer/ Best, WMcD Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mungkiman Posted February 18, 2014 Share Posted February 18, 2014 As an art major, I think this would be fascinating. Thanks, Gil. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Marvel Posted February 18, 2014 Share Posted February 18, 2014 I remember when Steadman's book came out in 2001, detailing what he thought was Vermeer's use of optics to get his paintings correct. I would love to see the whole documentary. Bruce Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
LarryC Posted February 18, 2014 Share Posted February 18, 2014 (edited) I saw it last weekend and recommend it. The website provides information. http://www.sonyclass...om/timsvermeer/ Yes, very interesting. I wondered if the principles of linear perspective developed in the early Renaissance, by Brunelleschi, Masacchio and others could explain it, and that seems to be the case: See http://www.princeton.edu/artandarchaeology/faculty/cheuer/Heuer-Vermeer-Res.pdf This link directs attention to tiny pinholes in Vermeer's paintings, some discovered by x-ray, which suggest the application of linear perspective to the painting these masterpieces. Brunelleschi was a principal developer and proponent of linear perspective in the early 1400's. He became the principal architect and builder of the incredible dome of the cathedral in Florence, Italy. Edited February 19, 2014 by LarryC Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
WMcD Posted February 20, 2014 Author Share Posted February 20, 2014 Hello all, My buddy Larry C. e-mailed me to bring my attention to his response and the article from Harvard. Thanks, Larry. I'm a bit hesitant to comment further. This is in keeping with a caustic tag line by one of the forum members. It said, essentially, you're an idiot because you don't know something which I just discovered yesterday. I work for someone like that. But I'll continue. The article from Harvard uses a lot of flowery language but, in my view, does not shed light on the overall subject and is mostly just a self serving tribute to the writing style of the author. Hey, is anyone here a fan of "The Eiger Sanction" novel and the following one "The Loo Sanction." ??? The protagonist is an art critic who collects fine art and trashes self serving art and criticism. And he is an assassin for a shadowy CIA type. Clint E made a movie of the first which was remarkable for mountain climbing. Unfortunately it is a bit cartoonish. Going back to the subject. I don't put much stock as a grand intellectual analysis and revelation in what Harvard is saying about pinholes. Today, art books and even mechanical engineering courses show the vanishing point and horizon (note similarity in horizon and horizontal). This pinhole in the canvas thing seemingly describes how an artist would use the technique of snapping a chalk line on small piece of canvas to make a strait line. Granted the whole perspective thing is based on straight lines and convergence. I think it is pretty dumb. Why would not an artist use a piece wood which is straight? And if the artist wanted to do this chalk line, why not put the pins out on the frame rather than in middle of the canvas. Yeah there can be some argument that the guys didn't have a straight edge. Nonsense. Vermeer's painting shows window frames with straight edge a keyboard instrument with straight edges, and floor tiles with straight edges. Anyway. . . It does seem that perspective drawing based on converging line was pretty much invented in the 1400's in Europe. Ya gotta wonder why it took so long. But I wonder why man had been making stone buildings for millennia before the Romans came up with the arch. It has long been suspected that the masters of the time were using variations on the camera obscura. Granted, this would have allowed the conceptualization of convergent lines. Yet Tim's Vermeer discussed, if briefly, how this is not enough to explain the results achieved by Vermeer. Part of it is the meticulous color fidelity and definition. Tim's Vermeer explains this. Tim is essentially using a small mirror as a type of beam splitter. As he describes, when his painting is correct, the edge of the mirror disappears. It is worth pointing out that Vermeer had six works which were staged in the same room, as described in the movie. On the other hand let us look at the work of http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Canaletto Here we have grand panoramas of cities. It may be that he started with some very sophisticated optics and added his own understanding of color and tone. Best, WMcD Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.