Exhibition Overview: Vermeer’s Secrets
ฝัง
- เผยแพร่เมื่อ 26 พ.ย. 2024
- Only about 35 paintings by Johannes Vermeer are known today. The National Gallery owns four works by or attributed to this beloved 17th-century Dutch artist. For decades, conservators, scientists, and curators at the National Gallery have conducted research into this quartet of paintings as well as two enigmatic works that are now considered to be 20th-century forgeries. Vermeer’s Secrets draws on 50 years of imaging technology and microscopic examination to illuminate-and sometimes revolutionize-our understanding of how Vermeer achieved the compelling effects of his paintings’ light-filled moments of quiet solitude. Betsy Wieseman, curator and head of the department of Northern European paintings, discusses the Vermeer’s Secrets exhibition.
Learn more about the exhibition: www.nga.gov/ex...
Still haven’t subscribed to our TH-cam channels?
National Gallery of Art ►► / nationalgalleryofartus
National Gallery of Art Talks ►► / nationalgalleryofarttalks
ABOUT THE NATIONAL GALLERY OF ART
The National Gallery of Art serves the nation by welcoming all people to explore and experience art, creativity, and our shared humanity.
More National Gallery of Art Content:
Facebook: / nationalgalleryofart
Twitter: / ngadc
Instagram: / ngadc
Pinterest: / _created
E-News: nga.us4.list-m...
#Art
#NationalGalleryOfArt
#Vermeer
#Dutch
#MicroscopicExamination
#17thCentury
#BetsyWieseman
#Paiting
#GirlWithTheRedHat
#WomanHoldingABalance
#ALadyWriting
#GirlWithTheRedHat
#GirlWithAFlute
Artists can paint in different styles depending on the mood, or hand function, or time frame. Artists are not robots.
Years and years ago during some browsing of art books, I was excited to find the “Girl With a Flute” painting in the table of contents, because I was a flutist (still am!). When I looked at the painting, I was disappointed that the wooden flute wasn’t very visible, and I thought it was some kind of recorder, and not a wooden flute of the period. At any rate, I remember thinking the hand holding the flute, especially, was very crudely painted to the point of ugliness. I never for a moment thought it wasn’t a Vermeer because I’m not even nearly any kind of expert, but I will say it didn’t surprise me at all when I learned it wasn’t painted by Vermeer.
Benjamin Binstock's book, "
Vermeer's Family Secrets: Genius, Discovery, and the Unknown Apprentice" posits that Vermeer's daughter was his uncredited studio assistant. In "girl with a flute" it looks he gave her studio scraps to play with, an old panel, a ratty brush and some gritty paint.
The earings on Girl In The Red Hat just like Tha Girl With The Pearl Earring are actually white paint brush strokes. Brilliant representation.
Superb. Discussion thank you
Fascinating! Thank you so much!
36:03 there are a million and one reasons why a paint or varnish layer might crack on an underlying paint layer not having dried thoroughly. Perhaps Vermeer needed the sale. Perhaps he rushed it. Perhaps it was a cold winter and he knew he was taking a bit of a risk. But let`s not forget these cracks take decades to start to develop and by that stage Vermeer is long gone. He had a large family to feed for Heaven`s sake. Maybe he just went ahead and pushed on as he could not wait. To go from a crack to this was not Vermeer is nonsense, it is but one of many other much more commonplace and common-sensical theories. This proves nothing. So what else is there....?
The image of the man could have been Vermeer himself.
Not convinced. Just hypothesis’ . Not a single strong argument. Experts have nothing better to do but to create theories and come up with conclusions based on idea that they can trace artists’ way of work. Useless talk.
I don't understand. What is the harm in trying to learn about great artists and how they worked? I love this and glad they have the ability to do what they do and share with the world. Do they know absolutely everything about the mood or temperament of the artists they study, no, of course not. But we can certainly learn more through science than we ever could from simply looking at a painting. I say bravo to these researchers.
Assuming both Red Hat / Flute paintings are both confirmed to be 17th Century Dutch originals (i.e. not more modern forgeries) - why would another artist or assistant ('X') attempt to copy or emulate just one single painting - if there were a few more examples perhaps this could add weight to Vermeer adopting X as an understudy - but I think he was quite occupied outside of his painting and would not have had the capacity or possibly money to afford one - at various points in his career he was art dealer, publican, in the local militia, head of a guild - plus a family of 14 offspring and domestic challenges with relatives - I think it's quite possible Flute was simply rushed and in an experimental context anyway - although the hand / thumb bottom left is simply amateurish, can't believe it isn't overpaint (?!) - if it is original then I think Vermeer must have been in a troubled mental state at that time, the bristles of cheap or worn out brushes may simply have been a sign of financial difficulty ...
i think the original supposition was the correct one. part vermeer, part someone else. parts of it scream vermeer.
why did she not mention the horrible clumsily painted hand? not up to vermeer’s standard at all. red hat girl and flute girl are one offs…. he could just have been experimenting, hence the less finely ground pigments.
It may help to learn something of Art to do this job…. Can u say that 5 times fast!
Sacrilegious! No evidence that would hold in a court of law not even enough to get a prosecutor to go for a lawsuit/ possible conviction. Weak, delusional made up circumstantial evidence. Her wannabe jokes aren’t funny nor wanted. This lady had my blood boiling within the first 10 min of the video. I think she should have done needle point together with her zoom team of bored fantasy chasers.
Brushier?? The girl with a flute is definitely by Vermeer. This idiotic museum needs to give the Vermeers to Holland because they haven’t got a clue
ROFL - they are saying that a human being can detect visual differences in a Vermillion glaze or scumble of 2 um two microns. That is absurd. I mean this is now really starting to become completely detached from reality. I would follow the argument if a completely new pigment were being introduced. Or mixed with something new. Or if poppy oil were used instead of linseed. Or even if it were heated linseed. Or mixed with litharge. Or megilp. Or SOMETHING....but two F-ing microns?? Are you nuts!!
Hilarious! "Dream team" ? Yeah righ! Luckily masterpiece paintings , such as these by Vermeer, long outlive the alterior motives and short sighted views of lesser mortals...
stopped after 2.00 mins...Art museum people full of self importance... I rather enjoy Vermeer ( the important one )without listening to this nonsense and keep the mystery of Vermeer alive.
Unreal. Now it is a few brush hairs. It gets worse and did not think that were possible. Total tosh. Agree with the attribution. But to take a view based upon this so called "evidence" really indicates something else going on here. Political? Something. Because to reach such a conclusion on this is woefully lacking and bordering on arrogance. If a 15-year old brought this thesis to my table for marking and concluded as they do I would fail him. Or her. Let`s not forget gender neutrality. After all, NGA didn`t did they. No, they make a point of that. But they seem however to have forgotten the rudiments of something much more important: common sense. Please....where is the return to sanity? Come back Brian Sewell, God rest him, all is forgiven.