When viewing this I was captivated by the girl's lips. In the full view, the bottom lip looks not just full and moist, but slightly wet. Zooming in, it's a bit of a muddy mess with only a splash of white giving definition to the (anatomical) left of the girl's mouth.<p>In my current incarnation I'm a fledgling novelist and one of the things I've learned is to trust the audience to 'fill in the gaps'. Although this is probably obvious already to many, the parallel between that and the way that we sort of do that when we look at paintings suddenly hit me.
I highly recommend the movie "Tim's Vermeer" about the likelihood that Vermeer used something like a lightbox to paint his paintings. Specifically, his ability to reproduce light and color is unmatched while he only had basic training as a painter and never let anyone see him work. A fascinating engineering problem to deduce how he might have accomplished this.
Steve Mould just released a video about the microscopy technique that was used to capture this 3D relief of the painting: <a href="https://youtu.be/o-dZKBwbsis" rel="nofollow">https://youtu.be/o-dZKBwbsis</a>
Saw this picture at the Mauritshuis museum in The Hague. There are a couple funny things about it:<p>* It is surprisingly small<p>* It is kinda "fuzzy" or "blurry", you can't detect too much brushwork.<p>* It is very expressive<p>But my favorite Vermeer is not this, it is View of Delft, also in the Mauritshuis. The colors, hues and textures on it are just amazing.<p>For Brazilians, a funny curiosity: Mauritshuis means House of Maurice. It is really the former residence of Maurice of Nassau (Maurício de Nassau), the governor of the Dutch colonies in Brazil. This museum also have some interesting works by Rugendas and other painters showing life in colonial Brazil and a very cool collection of puppets made with bread paste showing life in colonial Indonesia.<p>The Mauritshuis is a very good reason to visit The Hague. If you go there take a walk to the M.C. Escher museum too.
This painting really needs some Baumgartner intervention.<p>There are hints of overpainting around the right eye (left side facing us). Background plus eyebrow. Too smooth, doesn't have the same crackle as the rest of the painting.<p>The veneer may be quite yellowed. Looking at the cloth on the top of the head over the blue fabric. Might originally be a bright white, but now appears yellowed due to exposure of the last veneer aging and yellowing under UV light.
When you zoom in on the cracks, you can see the bevel on the edge of the crack. That’s incredible.<p>In many places on the edges of the cracks in the dark background you can see tinges of blue or pink color. Is that from the lighting, or is the color actually there, if it is there, anyone have an idea why?
It's a beautiful painting.<p>I also can't stand the sight of it.<p>It has been abused as a kitchy backdrop on so much tat and assorted items — including wheelie bins, recycling bins, garden fences, pillows, phone covers, and posters — to such an extent that it just oozes bad taste by implication.<p>Poor girl.
The company behind this has a making of on YouTube: <a href="https://youtu.be/j_MvpMlgfwI?si=mK9LWleFBE8r_saz" rel="nofollow">https://youtu.be/j_MvpMlgfwI?si=mK9LWleFBE8r_saz</a>
Any work related to deconstructing these classic paintings? I’ve been thinking about an AI project where you basically analyze paintings based on brush strokes. The end result would be an animation of painting from blank canvas to completion.
Amazing, I feel like I'm zooming in to some alien city.<p>I'm sure people are thinking about it, but with high resolution scanning, 3D printing, etc., it feels like it should be possible to create extremely high quality reproductions of famous artwork at scale, and at a fairly reasonable cost.<p>Is anyone working on this?
There are plenty of these here :)<p><a href="https://artsandculture.google.com/search/asset?project=art-camera" rel="nofollow">https://artsandculture.google.com/search/asset?project=art-c...</a>
I was immediately drawn to the faint text in the upper left. Meer I could read but it's the artist's signature. <a href="https://www.essentialvermeer.com/references/signatures/facsimile-2017/earring.jpg" rel="nofollow">https://www.essentialvermeer.com/references/signatures/facsi...</a>
Paintings are not photographs. Paintings are not two-dimensional images. They are 3d sculptures that change based on light causing a million little shadows. Similarly, the paint has transparency and depth. A trillion pixels wouldn't be enough to convey the experience of actually being in the same room with such a painting.
There is a company doing the same for microscopy.
Super large scale images of anything in the centimeter scale.<p><a href="https://gallery.ramonaoptics.com/gallery" rel="nofollow">https://gallery.ramonaoptics.com/gallery</a>
I'm not versed enough in history of art to fully appreciate this painting and how it became so popular, could someone point me to some resources to improve my culture on the matter?<p>Thanks in advance for any reply
Projects like this are fascinating for reasons, I guess, unintentional to their creators.<p>Is what you can see at this level of detail helping anyone understand the painting?<p>Someone thinks so. So what do we now know?
When I visited the Mauritshuis when they were scanning it I managed to spot something looking like a Solaris workstation next to the scanner. I was kinda surprised to see it...