Along the same lines, I just finished reading "Vermeer's Camera" by Philip Steadman (Oxford U. Press, 2001). This is an excellent discussion of the topic, as it relates to Vermeer. Anyone on the list interested in the camera obscura, optics, or art in general would probably find it interesting. It is clearly written and technical only to the extent required to make the case (for thoes who like the technical data, it's all available in extensive appendices). The thesis is very quietly but persuasively argued, I think. I have always believed in the idea of Vermeer having used the camera obscura, but there is not a shred of doubt in my mind now. The author successfully uses the geometry of many of the paintings to recreate the rooms they would have been painted in. He shows that these rooms are in many cases identical and that a camera obscura in the position required to paint them would have projected an image on the back wall of the room that is exactly the size of many of the paintings. It's hard to explain, but very interesting. I highly recommend the book. There is a companion Web site, but i can't find the URL at the moment. A search on the author and the obvious words from the title of the book should locate it though.
Colin --- Joao Ribeiro <jribe...@greco.com.br> wrote: > Hi folks, > > Just came across this site and thought it might > interest us, the > pinholers. > http://www.artandoptics.com/ > It is about David Hockney's theory of artist using > optical instruments > since the 15th century. > Cheers > Joao > > > _______________________________________________ > Pinhole-Discussion mailing list > Pinhole-Discussion@p at ??????? > unsubscribe or change your account at > http://www.???????/discussion/ __________________________________________________ Do You Yahoo!? Buy the perfect holiday gifts at Yahoo! Shopping. http://shopping.yahoo.com
