And let us not forget that a lot of Vermeers were actually painted by the forger Van Meegeren in the early 20th century. _http://www.essentialvermeer.com/misc/van_meegeren.html_ (http://www.essentialvermeer.com/misc/van_meegeren.html) Devon In a message dated 10/19/2011 12:11:23 P.M. Eastern Daylight Time, [email protected] writes:
On 10/19/11, [email protected] <[email protected]> wrote: > But then again, oil paintings are not photographs. Absolutely. The image can be altered even as the paint drys which takes a while with oils. By the small size of The Lacemaker painting (referred to as a 'tiny gem' in an art history text), I'd dare say it was a study, or for practice, something the artist did between commissions. The subject was conveniently within the household, if indeed this is a daughter, the pose could have been sketched lightly in oils while the girl was present, enhanced later. The stationary objects could be left in place for another day of painting if the girl wasn't there. Well, one can speculate for hours on the how :p FWIW I read that this painting is one of few of Vermeer's work where the light is coming from the right. > wants to paint rich fabrics and beautiful interiors. After all, you have to > sell these things to people for decorative purposes. -- Bev in Shirley BC, near Sooke on beautiful Vancouver Island, west coast of Canada - To unsubscribe send email to [email protected] containing the line: unsubscribe lace [email protected]. For help, write to [email protected]. Photo site: http://community.webshots.com/user/arachne2003
