That is a lazy excuse :)
Please go on about the brushwork.
On 11.11.19 15:28, r.turov...@gmail.com wrote:
It would be too complicated for a layman.
You have to simmer in paint for years to understand how style works. In a
nutshell - brushwork tells all.
RT
====
http://turovsky.org
Feci quod potui. Faciant meliora potentes.
On Nov 11, 2019, at 9:24 AM, Tristan von Neumann <tristanvonneum...@gmx.de>
wrote:
Roman,
claiming some uncorroborated prowess does not make me understand what is
going on in the painting.
Can you at least *try* to describe to me how you came to your conclusion?
As I said. I want to learn, and just having to trust you does not make
me feel comfortable.
:)
T*
On 11.11.19 14:53, Roman Turovsky wrote:
I have a 50 year experience in visual arts, so...
Stylistically is absolutely post-1600.
It is also worth looking at such material culture elements as clothing,
same anachronism.
RT
On 11/10/2019 11:50 PM, Tristan von Neumann wrote:
You just repeated yourself...
You cannot say "is from the 1600s" for what you perceive as a style,
without any explanation...
:)
T*
On 11.11.19 04:41, Roman Turovsky wrote:
Neusiedler was Cranach the Younger's contemporary.
The portrait in question stylistically is from the 1600's.
It also doesn't look look German.
RT
On 11/10/2019 3:20 PM, Tristan von Neumann wrote:
Roman, what is your rationale for your stylistic argument?
On 10.11.19 20:04, Roman Turovsky wrote:
What is the rationale for ascribing the sitter to be Neusiedler?
The painting stylistically at least a generation later than the
Neusiedler's life dates.
RT
On 11/10/2019 11:03 AM, Wayne Cripps wrote:
I posted Arthur’s picture of Melchior Newsidler at
https://home.cs.dartmouth.edu/~wbc/lute-old/MN_OsloJ3.jpg
Wayne
To get on or off this list see list information at
http://www.cs.dartmouth.edu/~wbc/lute-admin/index.html
