Caravaggio was rediscovered because of the camera
The Filter^ likes Caravaggio. Back in April 2004 Steve posted an article about David Hockney's bold conjecture that Caravaggio used lenses:
To use scientific, albeit basic, propositions to understand art history provides a fresh approach. I also like the commercialisation of the thesis, in the form of a glossy hardback book, endorsed by a famous contemporary artist - good, technical ideas shouldn't be restricted to peer-reviewed journals.
That prompted a comment from David Stork:
While the scholarly community was caught off guard by the media onslaught and extraordinary media advantage of Mr. Hockney and his public relations experts, the slow, careful analysis of experts who follow accepted protocol of expert peer-review journal articles rather than broad popular presentations in the popular media, are rebutting piece by piece each of the bold claims of Hockney
I've not really waded into the debate, but from afar find it fascinating. So I was interested to read Jonathan Jone's naivety in The Guardian:
I've never given much thought to his relationship with photography – until now
Interesting throughout. Also, in the process of writing this article I looked back through the "art" category of The Filter^. There's a few real gems. We aint all about economics.
Recent Comments