MetCollects-Episode 6 / 2015: Michael Gallagher on "Everhard Jabach and His Family"
Вставка
- Опубліковано 8 чер 2015
- "What does it take to revive a masterwork?" Michael Gallagher on conserving Charles Le Brun's Everhard Jabach and His Family
Michael Gallagher is Sherman Fairchild Chairman of Paintings Conservation
Charles Le Brun (French, 1619-1690). Everhard Jabach (1618-1695) and His Family, ca. 1660. Oil on canvas; 110 1/4 x 129 1/8 in. (280 x 328 cm). The Metropolitan Museum of Art, New York, Purchase, Mrs. Charles Wrightsman Gift, in honor of Keith Christiansen, 2014 (2014.250)
www.metmuseum.org/collection/t...
MetCollects introduces highlights of works of art recently acquired by the Met through gifts and purchases. Discover a new work each month.
www.metmuseum.org/collection/m...
Credits
Director: Christopher Noey
Producer and Editor: Kate Farrell
Camera: Sarah Cowan, Kate Farrell, Lisa Rifkind
Design: Natasha Mileshina
Music: Austin Fisher
Explore more on MetMedia:
www.metmuseum.org/metmedia/video
whoever folded back the top way back when, that was a monstrous thing to do.
amazing how the new varnish brought out the colors.
Its a great pity the Met videos on UA-cam are so short. There must be so many guest speakers - specialists and academics - at the Met? Its a pity more of them aren't uploaded.
I agree , it would be nice if they were longer , I love the met , it's an institution of learning .
Beautiful restoration.
yes
The colors are vibrant and the figures sit in space with air all around them. Very nice
Literally a massive undertaking.... this work makes my heart stop...😍 plus the restoration!!!! AMAZING!!!!!!!!!!
You almost don’t see the flaws...
To anyone who loves paint conservation I would absolutely 100% recommend watching the channel Baumgartner Restoration. He does fantastic narrated restoration videos. Thoroughly enjoyable. X
I finished all of Baumgartner's videos... that's why I'm here!
He is the best🎨💯
Stapples are bad, tacks are good 🤭
Mage you mean, staples are inferior and tacks superior😂 I want that shirt
wonderful work of art.
Beautiful piece, beautiful job
What an amazing job! Well done!!!!
I could watch that all day!!
Such a beautiful piece
A true artist a work.Bravo
That is awesome! Great work.
Wonderful just beautiful done...great job well done...
WONDERFULL PAINTING..... AND CAREFULLY AMAZING JOB .
wow..incredible restoration and talent!
Beautiful
just amazing!!!...
AWSOME JOB
That was fascinating.
This must have been an especially difficult endeavor given the way the canvas was stretched in the past. Shoutout to the team for handling it well, good job!
kudos!
Amazing
Great job!
I wonder how many hours the artist would have needed to paint it...
hackneysaregreat mounts, no years!!!! Its oil paint. One layer needs weeks to dry!
william turner took about 3 years to paint a boat on water....this behemoth definitely took years and years...that baby may have been married off by the time it got done XD
Beautiful 😍 wow.
Wow!
Coolness!
I KNEW IVE SEEN THAT PAINTING BEFORE
*The Met, NYC:* Informative 5-min video with Michael Gallagher on conserving *_Everhard Jabach and His Family_* by *Charles Le Brun*
The Met info page on the painting: www.metmuseum.org/collection/the-collection-online/search/626692
Wow, impressive, this guy has great skills! very interesting stuff, Cheers Nightjar!
Dr. Bruce Banner hiding in plain sight at 4:18
how cute is the guy in blue socks
*Everhard*
At the better to show a full picture of the painting for seconds .
Great work but I want to know,how did they work on this without modern technology? Beautiful colors &sets it not seen today..Yes I'm an artist😊
William schlenger for the artist back than, it was all about creating a perfect piece of art. Now its all about beeing popular.
The art back than was paintet with heart, not like today. Also they werend blindet by photoshop and HD TV ect.
I don't understand the rolling part. What does that accomplish?
***** It's just a method for safely turning over the painting
+Rolling Timbre Yes, but the part I do not understand is, if the painting was attached to the canvas again ?? Which method or product they used ?? several, waxes, gums reversible, etc. This process is not seen in the video and this is my question
Emilia Darquea nails.
The painting gets detached from the wood struckture, they atech a new layer of paper on the back and restore the painting. Then they use the paper layer to pin it bag on the wood struckture with nails.
Jason Luong it just means that they can flip over the painting once they’ve done the necessary restoration to the back, and then be able to work on the front without damaging it. As I’m sure you’re aware there was that large crack in the painting that they had to fix, that was likely from
the painting being flipped over in a not so safe manner.
Emilia Darquea no, they use nails/tacks to reattach the painting, it keeps it in place and is very reversible if you are careful. The nails are also stronger than something like staples so they can ho,d the weight of the large painting.
Marvelous masterpiece; except for this horrible square-toed shoe at 4:33. I can't believe there's people still using those ugly shoes to this day.
I used to love going to the met. But it feels lately like I'm not wanted there. Tehe ticket sellers are rude. The guards are still very nice but I don't know. The magic is gone.
I honestly prefer the aged coloring
but that wasn't the original plan of the artists, besides he lse a bunch of detail cause the painting gets all dark
@@dark3rthanshadows that doesn't stop me from liking it.
Byamba it’s not very good for the painting though, lots of details can be lost with yellowing, old varnishes, plus the original artist did not envision the painting that way, so it’s the job of the conservationists to simply make it closer to the original. It would be a shame to lose all of those details and more dramatic lighting anyways. However I can still see why you might prefer the darker colouring.
I prefer the aged colors honestly
eh, looked better in the beginning.
***** That's just so demonstrably false.
Before: www.thehistoryblog.com/wp-content/uploads/2014/05/A-Portrait-of-Everhard-Jabach-and-Family-Charles-le-Brun-17th-c.jpg
After:www.thehistoryblog.com/wp-content/uploads/2015/05/Everhard-Jabach-and-His-Family-by-Charles-Le-Brun-ca.-1660-after-conservation.jpg
Wish they'd stop arrogantly "restoring" paintings like this. More often than not they simply look better before the interventions. It's like the Sistine Chapel ceiling - so much of it was repainted you can hardly even call it the same painting anymore...
Simon Coles I personally think the painting looks even more incredible than it had beforehand. The varnish they used really brought out the colors which I am sure are just as saturated and similar to what it looked like back when it was first created.
Simon Coles I will say I am absolutely 100% NOT an expert on art or painting though, so the above is just my opinion.
Simon Coles
Restoration is a delicate process and shouldn't in any way compromise the original work. I see nothing arrogant about it, also restoration =/= repainting. And for anything to last restoration is a must or these things just vanish in time.
+oR3Io I kinda understand where he come from. There was a case with Vermeer's "Lady holding a balance" where a restorator decided to repaint the light reflection on a picture frame in the painting. The addition was discovered using x-rays and the added paint was then removed. It is an example of how repainting can be an 'arrogant' kind of restoration, but in the case of the Met's above I say the repainting helped the painting more than compromised it; I would certainly not like to see bare patches of naked canvas on such a magnificent oeuvre :)
Simon Coles Modern restoration standards require that none on the original paint is covered by the retouching and everything is easily reversible. The example in this video is excellent work.
Congratulazioni