Welcome to Atheist Discussion, a new community created by former members of The Thinking Atheist forum.

Thread Rating:
  • 1 Vote(s) - 5 Average
  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
Old Made New
#1

Old Made New
A few years ago, I attended an interesting show of 17th century Dutch & Flemish works. It mainly consisted of portraits of fairly wealthy couples wearing their expensive clothing, standing or seated somewhere about their property. The paintings were privately commissioned works, mainly to celebrate the wealth & fortunate marriage of the sitters.  

I'd always seen reproductions of these works, which seemed a bit dingy & kind of boring, really.  However, this show was purposefully presented as a show of restored works - they were "cleaned up".  They were no longer dull, drab, shadowy, & certainly, no longer boring.  These were lush, jewel-like, resplendent with vibrant & deep, saturated color. This was the origional view of the artist who painted what was there.

The works were not "famous" pieces at all.  They were on show to give the public an idea of what could be in the context of restorative technique.  One was left with the feeling of having traveled back through history to experience these works in "real time".  

I kind of wanted to hate this show but, I came away with a very changed perspective.  My new view was "color corrected".  True history is truly exciting!

So, Vermeer.  
How or even, why would anyone want to tweak what is already extremely satisfying, perfection?  
[Image: Johannes_Vermeer_-_Girl_Reading_a_Letter...roject.jpg]
This particular piece, Girl Reading a Letter By An Open Window, was special to me.
This was the first piece of "fine art" I was exposed to.  It's a lot for a six year old but, the moment I saw it, I understood it - I understood everything because of it.  I understood composition, movement, perspective, color, & the only "god" I would ever have a personal relationship with:  light.  I got it. I got it all.  For me, this is a very personal work.

I'd known about the X-ray years ago - it was fun - exciting & interesting to speculate why he chose to cover it. Too busy or overpowering, perhaps?  The faint shadow was always there.  I suppose, I felt he just altered it for whatever reason he saw fit at the time.  

Time is fleeting.  Art is transient.

Now, the decision has been made...
[Image: Vermeer_Brieflesendes_Maedchen_2019_05_0...323476.jpg]
... the uncovering has begun.  

This in-progress restoration will be on display for a few months. After which, restoration will resume to finally reveal the fully restored artist's origional view.

I wanted to hate it.
I do not.
I feel ... changed.  And, I'm excited by this change!  This friend I've carried with me for so many years, is about to say more!  For me, this is a privilege.

Here is a short BBC article on why the decision to restore was made & there's a quick video of the restorer at work.  Lucky guy.   Shy
________________________________________________
A new type of thinking is essential if mankind is to survive and move to higher levels. ~ Albert Einstein
The following 8 users Like Kim's post:
  • airportkid, Vera, Dom, Astreja, Deesse23, Dancefortwo, Thumpalumpacus, skyking
Reply
#2

Old Made New
(09-10-2021, 03:28 PM)Kim Wrote: A few years ago, I attended an interesting show of 17th century Dutch & Flemish works. It mainly consisted of portraits of fairly wealthy couples wearing their expensive clothing, standing or seated somewhere about their property. The paintings were privately commissioned works, mainly to celebrate the wealth & fortunate marriage of the sitters.  

I'd always seen reproductions of these works, which seemed a bit dingy & kind of boring, really.  However, this show was purposefully presented as a show of restored works - they were "cleaned up".  They were no longer dull, drab, shadowy, & certainly, no longer boring.  These were lush, jewel-like, resplendent with vibrant & deep, saturated color.  This was the origional view of the artist who painted what was there.

The works were not "famous" pieces at all.  They were on show to give the public an idea of what could be in the context of restorative technique.  One was left with the feeling of having traveled back through history to experience these works in "real time".  

I kind of wanted to hate this show but, I came away with a very changed perspective.  My new view was "color corrected".  True history is truly exciting!

So, Vermeer.  
How or even, why would anyone want to tweak what is already extremely satisfying, perfection?  
[Image: Johannes_Vermeer_-_Girl_Reading_a_Letter...roject.jpg]
This particular piece, Girl Reading a Letter By An Open Window, was special to me.
This was the first piece of "fine art" I was exposed to.  It's a lot for a six year old but, the moment I saw it, I understood it - I understood everything because of it.  I understood composition, movement, perspective, color, & the only "god" I would ever have a personal relationship with:  light.  I got it. I got it all.  For me, this is a very personal work.

I'd known about the X-ray years ago - it was fun - exciting & interesting to speculate why he chose to cover it. Too busy or overpowering, perhaps?  The faint shadow was always there.  I suppose, I felt he just altered it for whatever reason he saw fit at the time.  

Time is fleeting.  Art is transient.

Now, the decision has been made...
[Image: Vermeer_Brieflesendes_Maedchen_2019_05_0...323476.jpg]
... the uncovering has begun.  

This in-progress restoration will be on display for a few months. After which, restoration will resume to finally reveal the fully restored artist's origional view.

I wanted to hate it.
I do not.
I feel ... changed.  And, I'm excited by this change!  This friend I've carried with me for so many years, is about to say more!  For me, this is a privilege.

Here is a short BBC article on why the decision to restore was made & there's a quick video of the restorer at work.  Lucky guy.   Shy

I'd be curious to see the restored version (though part of me feels like the cupid will be two much, clashing with the girl. But we shall see, I certainly know nothing about art).

Reminds of that painting I posted about recently, where they'd given the poor girl a smile (cause of course, "you should smile more" Dodgy )

[Image: 2572.jpg?width=445&quality=45&auto=forma...078004cf2c]

[Image: 5213.jpg?width=445&quality=45&auto=forma...f8345b232b]
“We drift down time, clutching at straws. But what good's a brick to a drowning man?” 
The following 2 users Like Vera's post:
  • Kim, skyking
Reply
#3

Old Made New
(09-10-2021, 05:49 PM)Vera Wrote: I'd be curious to see the restored version (though part of me feels like the cupid will be two much, clashing with the girl. But we shall see, I certainly know nothing about art).

I'm curious as well. I've always been attracted to the negative space area - it's very existence is a lesson in abstraction. And why busy up a space when it can be stripped down with such calming satisfaction?
Guess we'll find out in a couple years. Shy

(09-10-2021, 05:49 PM)Vera Wrote: Reminds of that painting I posted about recently, where they'd given the poor girl a smile (cause of course, "you should smile more" Dodgy )

[Image: 2572.jpg?width=445&quality=45&auto=forma...078004cf2c]

[Image: 5213.jpg?width=445&quality=45&auto=forma...f8345b232b]

I recall & loved that post! Heart
Cleaned up, everything is far more realistic & beautiful. Her original expression is far more revealing. She doesn't trust you - you're probably going to nick an apple. She's there to sell produce, damnit! Why would she smile?
Also, the boob job was just degrading. Dodgy
________________________________________________
A new type of thinking is essential if mankind is to survive and move to higher levels. ~ Albert Einstein
The following 1 user Likes Kim's post:
  • Vera
Reply
#4

Old Made New
(09-10-2021, 03:28 PM)Kim Wrote: A few years ago, I attended an interesting show of 17th century Dutch & Flemish works. It mainly consisted of portraits of fairly wealthy couples wearing their expensive clothing, standing or seated somewhere about their property. The paintings were privately commissioned works, mainly to celebrate the wealth & fortunate marriage of the sitters.  

I'd always seen reproductions of these works, which seemed a bit dingy & kind of boring, really.  However, this show was purposefully presented as a show of restored works - they were "cleaned up".  They were no longer dull, drab, shadowy, & certainly, no longer boring.  These were lush, jewel-like, resplendent with vibrant & deep, saturated color.  This was the origional view of the artist who painted what was there.

The works were not "famous" pieces at all.  They were on show to give the public an idea of what could be in the context of restorative technique.  One was left with the feeling of having traveled back through history to experience these works in "real time".  

I kind of wanted to hate this show but, I came away with a very changed perspective.  My new view was "color corrected".  True history is truly exciting!

So, Vermeer.  
How or even, why would anyone want to tweak what is already extremely satisfying, perfection?  
[Image: Johannes_Vermeer_-_Girl_Reading_a_Letter...roject.jpg]
This particular piece, Girl Reading a Letter By An Open Window, was special to me.
This was the first piece of "fine art" I was exposed to.  It's a lot for a six year old but, the moment I saw it, I understood it - I understood everything because of it.  I understood composition, movement, perspective, color, & the only "god" I would ever have a personal relationship with:  light.  I got it. I got it all.  For me, this is a very personal work.

I'd known about the X-ray years ago - it was fun - exciting & interesting to speculate why he chose to cover it. Too busy or overpowering, perhaps?  The faint shadow was always there.  I suppose, I felt he just altered it for whatever reason he saw fit at the time.  

Time is fleeting.  Art is transient.

Now, the decision has been made...
[Image: Vermeer_Brieflesendes_Maedchen_2019_05_0...323476.jpg]
... the uncovering has begun.  

This in-progress restoration will be on display for a few months. After which, restoration will resume to finally reveal the fully restored artist's origional view.

I wanted to hate it.
I do not.
I feel ... changed.  And, I'm excited by this change!  This friend I've carried with me for so many years, is about to say more!  For me, this is a privilege.

Here is a short BBC article on why the decision to restore was made & there's a quick video of the restorer at work.  Lucky guy.   Shy
I saw a story about this. Vermeer puts so many little symbolic extras in his paintings that I'm not surprised that there was originally a Cupid back there. (Cupid's hair, by the way...OMG)  What I'm curious about is who decided it needed to be painted over, and why. 

At 6 did you see the work at a museum, or was it a print in a book, something else? I would love to have been someone with that sensitive of perception at that age, but wasn't.
god, ugh
The following 1 user Likes julep's post:
  • Kim
Reply
#5

Old Made New
(09-10-2021, 07:22 PM)julep Wrote:
(09-10-2021, 03:28 PM)Kim Wrote: A few years ago, I attended an interesting show of 17th century Dutch & Flemish works. It mainly consisted of portraits of fairly wealthy couples wearing their expensive clothing, standing or seated somewhere about their property. The paintings were privately commissioned works, mainly to celebrate the wealth & fortunate marriage of the sitters.  

I'd always seen reproductions of these works, which seemed a bit dingy & kind of boring, really.  However, this show was purposefully presented as a show of restored works - they were "cleaned up".  They were no longer dull, drab, shadowy, & certainly, no longer boring.  These were lush, jewel-like, resplendent with vibrant & deep, saturated color.  This was the origional view of the artist who painted what was there.

The works were not "famous" pieces at all.  They were on show to give the public an idea of what could be in the context of restorative technique.  One was left with the feeling of having traveled back through history to experience these works in "real time".  

I kind of wanted to hate this show but, I came away with a very changed perspective.  My new view was "color corrected".  True history is truly exciting!

So, Vermeer.  
How or even, why would anyone want to tweak what is already extremely satisfying, perfection?  
[Image: Johannes_Vermeer_-_Girl_Reading_a_Letter...roject.jpg]
This particular piece, Girl Reading a Letter By An Open Window, was special to me.
This was the first piece of "fine art" I was exposed to.  It's a lot for a six year old but, the moment I saw it, I understood it - I understood everything because of it.  I understood composition, movement, perspective, color, & the only "god" I would ever have a personal relationship with:  light.  I got it. I got it all.  For me, this is a very personal work.

I'd known about the X-ray years ago - it was fun - exciting & interesting to speculate why he chose to cover it. Too busy or overpowering, perhaps?  The faint shadow was always there.  I suppose, I felt he just altered it for whatever reason he saw fit at the time.  

Time is fleeting.  Art is transient.

Now, the decision has been made...
[Image: Vermeer_Brieflesendes_Maedchen_2019_05_0...323476.jpg]
... the uncovering has begun.  

This in-progress restoration will be on display for a few months. After which, restoration will resume to finally reveal the fully restored artist's origional view.

I wanted to hate it.
I do not.
I feel ... changed.  And, I'm excited by this change!  This friend I've carried with me for so many years, is about to say more!  For me, this is a privilege.

Here is a short BBC article on why the decision to restore was made & there's a quick video of the restorer at work.  Lucky guy.   Shy
I saw a story about this. Vermeer puts so many little symbolic extras in his paintings that I'm not surprised that there was originally a Cupid back there. (Cupid's hair, by the way...OMG)  What I'm curious about is who decided it needed to be painted over, and why. 

At 6 did you see the work at a museum, or was it a print in a book, something else? I would love to have been someone with that sensitive of perception at that age, but wasn't.

It was a traveling museum showing "exact reproductions". I would suppose they must have been as good as they could get them at that time. It showcased some recent technology as I recall - it would have been 1967-'68 so, who knows how good that was?

These images were not origional works but, I was impressed beyond my teeny, tiny life. I don't know about sensitive perception but, I knew much more coming out of there, than going in. It may have been that thing that art can do - even if it's momentarily over your head, you instinctively know, there must be something there to be known. What I do know is: I was in it all the way.

I also recall a Rembrandt, a Picasso, a Modigliani, sculptures by Brancusi & Henry Moore. There were a couple of art historians there to speak about each piece & answer questions.

It was a small show, brought to grade school children in the middle of the country. The nearest actual art museum was a four hour drive away.
________________________________________________
A new type of thinking is essential if mankind is to survive and move to higher levels. ~ Albert Einstein
The following 1 user Likes Kim's post:
  • julep
Reply
#6

Old Made New
One of my favorite youtube channels is this guy:





I've talked about this guy before.  One thing I learned is that "restoring" a painting and "conserving" a painting are two different things.  Baumgartner restores the paintings so he not only cleans the painting he goes a step further and fixes other aspects of the painting.  He isn't working with museums.  Most of his clients are private people who keep the paintings in their home and not in museums which have rigid  temperature and humidity control systems throughout the buildings.   Most of his clients WANT their paintings restored and not just conserved.     

There was a lot of people who hated the Sistine Chapel conservation  because they removed too much of the original paint.   There was a lot of heated discussions about what was done and many art historians are furious about what has happened to the ceiling. 

Here the cleaning removed her pupils!   

[Image: Jesse_spandrel_beforeandafter.jpg]

Many art critiques say the Sistine has a flat look now because the shadows are gone.  The colors are brighter though so I kinda think it looks better than before. 

[Image: a52214a39a2d040f0b6d108a1bf6c66d.jpg]
                                                         T4618
The following 2 users Like Dancefortwo's post:
  • Kim, SYZ
Reply
#7

Old Made New
(09-10-2021, 03:28 PM)Kim Wrote: A few years ago, I attended an interesting show of 17th century Dutch & Flemish works. It mainly consisted of portraits of fairly wealthy couples wearing their expensive clothing, standing or seated somewhere about their property. The paintings were privately commissioned works, mainly to celebrate the wealth & fortunate marriage of the sitters.  

I'd always seen reproductions of these works, which seemed a bit dingy & kind of boring, really.  However, this show was purposefully presented as a show of restored works - they were "cleaned up".  They were no longer dull, drab, shadowy, & certainly, no longer boring.  These were lush, jewel-like, resplendent with vibrant & deep, saturated color.  This was the origional view of the artist who painted what was there.

The works were not "famous" pieces at all.  They were on show to give the public an idea of what could be in the context of restorative technique.  One was left with the feeling of having traveled back through history to experience these works in "real time".  

I kind of wanted to hate this show but, I came away with a very changed perspective.  My new view was "color corrected".  True history is truly exciting!

So, Vermeer.  
How or even, why would anyone want to tweak what is already extremely satisfying, perfection?  
[Image: Johannes_Vermeer_-_Girl_Reading_a_Letter...roject.jpg]
This particular piece, Girl Reading a Letter By An Open Window, was special to me.
This was the first piece of "fine art" I was exposed to.  It's a lot for a six year old but, the moment I saw it, I understood it - I understood everything because of it.  I understood composition, movement, perspective, color, & the only "god" I would ever have a personal relationship with:  light.  I got it. I got it all.  For me, this is a very personal work.

I'd known about the X-ray years ago - it was fun - exciting & interesting to speculate why he chose to cover it. Too busy or overpowering, perhaps?  The faint shadow was always there.  I suppose, I felt he just altered it for whatever reason he saw fit at the time.  

Time is fleeting.  Art is transient.

Now, the decision has been made...
[Image: Vermeer_Brieflesendes_Maedchen_2019_05_0...323476.jpg]
... the uncovering has begun.  

This in-progress restoration will be on display for a few months. After which, restoration will resume to finally reveal the fully restored artist's origional view.

I wanted to hate it.
I do not.
I feel ... changed.  And, I'm excited by this change!  This friend I've carried with me for so many years, is about to say more!  For me, this is a privilege.

Here is a short BBC article on why the decision to restore was made & there's a quick video of the restorer at work.  Lucky guy.   Shy

I could start a whole thread on Vermeer alone! 

 The fabric in the foreground was used in another painting.  It's a rug or some such thing.   Fabric is my interest and someone went to the trouble of tracing the weaving of that fabric to a specific place.  I can't remember where though.  

The Girl with the Pearl Earring is by far my favorite portrait painting.  The Mona Lisa is garbage compared to Vermeer's portrait.  

[Image: 800px-1665_Girl_with_a_Pearl_Earring.jpg]

Is she turning to say something to you?  Or has she said something to you and is about to turn away?   What might she tell you?  What might she have told you?   


[Image: 1777.jpg?width=700&quality=85&auto=forma...0ffcf4dd6f]

Also, it's more likely that the earring isn't pearl.  If it is that's a giant size pearl. Some jewelers have said that it's a glass earring which was popular during that time.
                                                         T4618
The following 1 user Likes Dancefortwo's post:
  • Kim
Reply
#8

Old Made New
It's of interest that nobody has quite of late mastered Vermeer's use of chiaroscuro (light and shade)
even when copied by masters in their own right, such as "The Lacemaker" by Salvador Dali.  Dali's
copy simply has none of the "life" that the Vermeer has; the whole canvas tends to look flat and
muddy, with a forced attempt at a 3D-style image by sharpening edges that should be soft—giving
it an almost cartoonish feel.

[Image: the_lacemaker.jpg]


Dali was more of a draughtsman, and never really utilised a painterly
style, rather using a linear method involving skillful drawing:
[Image: 572%20The%20Lacemaker%20(after%20Vermeer)%201955.jpg]



Apparently, Vermeer was influenced Caravaggio before him:

[Image: 24981541755_25ec1afb0f_z.jpg]
I'm a creationist;   I believe that man created God.
The following 2 users Like SYZ's post:
  • Kim, Vera
Reply
#9

Old Made New
(09-10-2021, 06:58 PM)Kim Wrote: I recall & loved that post!   Heart
Cleaned up, everything is far more realistic & beautiful.  Her original expression is far more revealing.  She doesn't trust you - you're probably going to nick an apple.  She's there to sell produce, damnit!  Why would she smile?  
Also, the boob job was just degrading.   Dodgy

Ha, I'd forgotten/not noticed the breasts (or just thought because of the age of painting it wasn't really clear what was happening up there ;-))

I guess boob-ey, smile-y girls have always been the ideal for women Dodgy

And oh god, that Dali one looks so... drab.
“We drift down time, clutching at straws. But what good's a brick to a drowning man?” 
The following 2 users Like Vera's post:
  • Kim, SYZ
Reply
#10

Old Made New
Somehow Vermeer could paint.....air.   I don't know how he did it but he captured air and painted it.  Amazing.  

[Image: 800px-Jan_Vermeer_van_Delft_019.jpg]

He used that map on the wall in some of his other paintings.  I happened onto a youtube video by a map enthusiast who waxed poetic over that Vermeer map. lol

I loved the movie about Vemeer. "Girl with the Pearl Earring".   I thought it was beautifully photographed.  Some people disliked it because it they thought it was too slow.  That's the very thing I loved about it.
                                                         T4618
The following 2 users Like Dancefortwo's post:
  • Kim, skyking
Reply
#11

Old Made New
I finally found a very well done documentation of the restoration, so far.

This statement stands out to me : 2 to 3 centimeters per day ...


The non-dutch speakers will want to hit the cc. Shy
________________________________________________
A new type of thinking is essential if mankind is to survive and move to higher levels. ~ Albert Einstein
Reply
#12

Old Made New
(09-10-2021, 08:49 PM)Dancefortwo Wrote:
(09-10-2021, 03:28 PM)Kim Wrote: A few years ago, I attended an interesting show of 17th century Dutch & Flemish works. It mainly consisted of portraits of fairly wealthy couples wearing their expensive clothing, standing or seated somewhere about their property. The paintings were privately commissioned works, mainly to celebrate the wealth & fortunate marriage of the sitters.  

I'd always seen reproductions of these works, which seemed a bit dingy & kind of boring, really.  However, this show was purposefully presented as a show of restored works - they were "cleaned up".  They were no longer dull, drab, shadowy, & certainly, no longer boring.  These were lush, jewel-like, resplendent with vibrant & deep, saturated color.  This was the origional view of the artist who painted what was there.

The works were not "famous" pieces at all.  They were on show to give the public an idea of what could be in the context of restorative technique.  One was left with the feeling of having traveled back through history to experience these works in "real time".  

I kind of wanted to hate this show but, I came away with a very changed perspective.  My new view was "color corrected".  True history is truly exciting!

So, Vermeer.  
How or even, why would anyone want to tweak what is already extremely satisfying, perfection?  
[Image: Johannes_Vermeer_-_Girl_Reading_a_Letter...roject.jpg]
This particular piece, Girl Reading a Letter By An Open Window, was special to me.
This was the first piece of "fine art" I was exposed to.  It's a lot for a six year old but, the moment I saw it, I understood it - I understood everything because of it.  I understood composition, movement, perspective, color, & the only "god" I would ever have a personal relationship with:  light.  I got it. I got it all.  For me, this is a very personal work.

I'd known about the X-ray years ago - it was fun - exciting & interesting to speculate why he chose to cover it. Too busy or overpowering, perhaps?  The faint shadow was always there.  I suppose, I felt he just altered it for whatever reason he saw fit at the time.  

Time is fleeting.  Art is transient.

Now, the decision has been made...
[Image: Vermeer_Brieflesendes_Maedchen_2019_05_0...323476.jpg]
... the uncovering has begun.  

This in-progress restoration will be on display for a few months. After which, restoration will resume to finally reveal the fully restored artist's origional view.

I wanted to hate it.
I do not.
I feel ... changed.  And, I'm excited by this change!  This friend I've carried with me for so many years, is about to say more!  For me, this is a privilege.

Here is a short BBC article on why the decision to restore was made & there's a quick video of the restorer at work.  Lucky guy.   Shy

I could start a whole thread on Vermeer alone! 

 The fabric in the foreground was used in another painting.  It's a rug or some such thing.   Fabric is my interest and someone went to the trouble of tracing the weaving of that fabric to a specific place.  I can't remember where though.  

The Girl with the Pearl Earring is by far my favorite portrait painting.  The Mona Lisa is garbage compared to Vermeer's portrait.  

[Image: 800px-1665_Girl_with_a_Pearl_Earring.jpg]

Is she turning to say something to you?  Or has she said something to you and is about to turn away?   What might she tell you?  What might she have told you?   


[Image: 1777.jpg?width=700&quality=85&auto=forma...0ffcf4dd6f]

Also, it's more likely that the earring isn't pearl.  If it is that's a giant size pearl. Some jewelers have said that it's a glass earring which was popular during that time.

You might enjoy the movie about her:

[Image: Girl_with_a_pearl_earring.jpg]
“I expect to pass this way but once; any good therefore that I can do, or any kindness that I can show to any fellow creature, let me do it now. Let me not defer or neglect it, for I shall not pass this way again.” (Etienne De Grellet)
The following 1 user Likes Gwaithmir's post:
  • Kim
Reply




Users browsing this thread: 1 Guest(s)