A projection may have been effected through small holes in the tents of prehistoric people, witness the drawings on cave walls depicting horses and cattle.
Great! How do I build one of the mirror and lens ones? What are the dimensions and equations I need for one I can draw on with a 9x6 or so frosted glass?
Vermeer used an optical device of some sort, the evidence is overwhelming but it was NOT a camera obscura. You cannot paint using a camera obscura only draw and there is no underdrawing on Vermeer's work.
Wrong. Vermeer would make 2 under-paintings including a drawing in charcoal first. This has been proven using paint core sampling and x-ray. That Tim's Vermeer documentary is pure hogwash. Vermeer for sure used a camera obscura to inform him of the edges and value transitions of his subject. Remember that he was an accomplished painter that lived in the time of Rembrandt (only about 60km away actually) before he started using this technology to improve his work. The lady with a red had (Maria Vermeer) is the first of these paintings that survives. He wasn't copying works like Tim accuses him of, he was checking the image projection against his work instead. Vermeer wasn't perfect either. His draftsmanship of people is rather rough, he has trouble with hands, and his anatomy of the models is very stiff. He is, however, the greatest painter that ever lived.
@@Splatterpunk_OldNewYork I can agree on the fact that he was one of the greatest painters. I too am a painter, we explore method and change our techniques for a variety of reasons over time, underdrawing does not explain the fact he produced tonal ranges repeatedly that we can't actually see! He didn't use a "Camera Obscura" to paint, that would be impossible, you can only draw with it. The genius in his work is the colour and tone not the composition. As Jenison said of Vermeer's paintings "It was like looking at a Kodachrome or a still from a video". The colour was so life like.
@@Splatterpunk_OldNewYork I suggest you look at the Jenison video again. Jenison made a slight error, at some point he moved the mirror which introduce a distortion into the "Music Lesson" painting he was creating. It caused a slight curve when reproducing the musical instrument. When he checked Vermeer's version it had the same distortion. This indicates he was using the mirror lens device for no only colour and tone but composition too!
@@kevinclarkson7036 I realize I might not have made myself clear. I do not mean Vermeer used a pinhole room effect to achieve his studies, that requires darkness, and makes painting impossible. He definitely used a compact camera obscura with a lens, a 45 mirror and a piece of frosted glass to project the reversed image onto it. Standard model in his time.He could have simply added to the already existing design with his own thinking. Tim's Vermeer setup is unwieldy, and not something an Aesthetic Obsessed painter like Vermeer would enjoy. As a painter myself, I have replicated this device, and find it lacking in function. The Camera Obscura which I have built, on the other hand, is the way to go. Like a cam-corder with a purposefully bad lens. Please understand that the curvature of the piano casement was done in the preliminary sketch and then under-painting (two of them) The colour and effects therein are not an indicator of him using this device. He could very well have used a camera obscura projection and traced that onto his panel first. This would have been low chroma but who cares. His composition however is manufactured like a stage, the device in question cannot give you that.
Awesome. Thank you for the explanation on how the Camera Obscura works. 🙂
Thank you for the informative and interesting story of the Camera Obscura
fantastic explanation!
A projection may have been effected through small holes in the tents of prehistoric people, witness the drawings on cave walls depicting horses and cattle.
Great! How do I build one of the mirror and lens ones? What are the dimensions and equations I need for one I can draw on with a 9x6 or so frosted glass?
the photographer gallery should know the history of photography and the rule of " IBN ALHAYTHAM " in discovering it.
After more than 350 years, the camera obscura comes in question, is the meaning of this to blame Johannes Vermeer and probably more painters ?
Vermeer used an optical device of some sort, the evidence is overwhelming but it was NOT a camera obscura. You cannot paint using a camera obscura only draw and there is no underdrawing on Vermeer's work.
Wrong. Vermeer would make 2 under-paintings including a drawing in charcoal first. This has been proven using paint core sampling and x-ray. That Tim's Vermeer documentary is pure hogwash. Vermeer for sure used a camera obscura to inform him of the edges and value transitions of his subject. Remember that he was an accomplished painter that lived in the time of Rembrandt (only about 60km away actually) before he started using this technology to improve his work. The lady with a red had (Maria Vermeer) is the first of these paintings that survives. He wasn't copying works like Tim accuses him of, he was checking the image projection against his work instead. Vermeer wasn't perfect either. His draftsmanship of people is rather rough, he has trouble with hands, and his anatomy of the models is very stiff. He is, however, the greatest painter that ever lived.
@@Splatterpunk_OldNewYork I can agree on the fact that he was one of the greatest painters. I too am a painter, we explore method and change our techniques for a variety of reasons over time, underdrawing does not explain the fact he produced tonal ranges repeatedly that we can't actually see! He didn't use a "Camera Obscura" to paint, that would be impossible, you can only draw with it. The genius in his work is the colour and tone not the composition. As Jenison said of Vermeer's paintings "It was like looking at a Kodachrome or a still from a video". The colour was so life like.
@@Splatterpunk_OldNewYork I suggest you look at the Jenison video again. Jenison made a slight error, at some point he moved the mirror which introduce a distortion into the "Music Lesson" painting he was creating. It caused a slight curve when reproducing the musical instrument. When he checked Vermeer's version it had the same distortion. This indicates he was using the mirror lens device for no only colour and tone but composition too!
@@kevinclarkson7036 I realize I might not have made myself clear. I do not mean Vermeer used a pinhole room effect to achieve his studies, that requires darkness, and makes painting impossible. He definitely used a compact camera obscura with a lens, a 45 mirror and a piece of frosted glass to project the reversed image onto it. Standard model in his time.He could have simply added to the already existing design with his own thinking. Tim's Vermeer setup is unwieldy, and not something an Aesthetic Obsessed painter like Vermeer would enjoy. As a painter myself, I have replicated this device, and find it lacking in function. The Camera Obscura which I have built, on the other hand, is the way to go. Like a cam-corder with a purposefully bad lens. Please understand that the curvature of the piano casement was done in the preliminary sketch and then under-painting (two of them) The colour and effects therein are not an indicator of him using this device. He could very well have used a camera obscura projection and traced that onto his panel first. This would have been low chroma but who cares. His composition however is manufactured like a stage, the device in question cannot give you that.
i thought that hole is a glory hole