|
Гуру
Регистрация: 24.02.2009
Адрес: Гамбург
Сообщений: 3,845
Спасибо: 3,565
Поблагодарили 4,959 раз(а) в 1,455 сообщениях
Репутация: 9306
|
hzp, the actual age of the virtual, with the monitor, not determined.
You better go to the nearest antiquary or gallery.
The composition, the ratio propisi parts, parts of the plot, optically, in my eyes, the work looks like a grab-bag.
Therefore, the view - replica.
Old Masters emphasized various technical methods of remote objects from the foreground to the back.
Decrease contrast object, decreasing the brightness of pigments, the proportional decrease in the subject, etc.
This small details remain, but converted to the foreground to the background already mentioned techniques.
For details of your work items is the second plan completely disappear.
The very composition of a surprise.
Old Masters with excessive tidiness subscribed insects, with "passion". Insects were put in the work as "painting in a painting" - freely, clearly and in all its glory. Ie snail or butterfly were usually "free", in plain sight in the compositions. If the only snail covered at 30%leaves the flower, it is not typical.
Another thing, that is the plot. In the background we can see the forest - the fields, and even town. This is a typical background, let's say for the baroque but ... In the foreground, while a bouquet of flowers in a vase or glassware, etc., in the background furniture, or simply objects of Baroque architecture.
The foreground of your work, this is a typical still life, which can be compared with makrosemkoy.
These typical field, and: bindweed, dandelion, milkweed insects around. Such a plot and logic, not on common sense should not have the background overlooking the woods and fields.
My "analysis" only a superficial "pass" on the job. The old masters existed on this subject unwritten laws. There everything is much deeper.
In the 19 th century started the fashion for the old masters and their copy, reproduce, explanations on an industrial scale. However, it was an imitation, copy as accurately as possible and work in optical logic does not cause censures.
If I'm wrong, correct me.
For me, the work has nothing to do with the Dutch, the Flemings, or their imitators 17 - 18 centuries, or works in the "style" of 19 century. But in Russia such things in those days few people wrote.
|