Monthly Masters' Critique - May 2016 - Velazquez's The Kitchen Maid
May 1, 2016 21:06:57 #
Whats in the frame? And how does that direct the story an image conveys?
We ask that you to share your thoughts about these two nearly identical artworks, and invite you to post two different versions of one of your images, where the way you present the image changes the story.
Diego Velazquez was a 17th century Spanish court painter. He is considered one of the great masters of Western art. These two paintings are the same but very different. The Mulata, which hangs in the Chicago Art Institute, is a portrait of a kitchen worker absorbed in her chores. The second, Kitchen Maid at Emmaus, which hangs in the National Gallery of Ireland, tells an entirely different story: while the kitchen worker takes up almost the same amount of space in the same area of the canvas, and has the same contextual setting, there is another subject: the seated figures in the back room, shown in the upper left corner, change everything. No longer a painting of an unknown servant in an unknown kitchen, this becomes a painting of Jesus having dinner at Emmaus with his companions. We know this story, and that changes even what we think about the kitchen maid.
KEY QUESTIONS TO CONSIDER:
*Do you like one painting more than the other?
*Why?
*Why do you think the artist may have created these two?
*Do you deliberately change the story in your photographs by what you include/exclude?
*Is it right or wrong to add or delete subject matter in a photograph by cropping/framing?
*Is it right or wrong to add or delete subject matter in a photography using software?
*How much control should the image-maker exert on the story he/she is telling?
*Is that control different when considering different kinds of art? (photography vs painting for example)
OTHER QUESTIONS FOR DEEPER PARTICIPATION:
*When shooting, how do we decide what to keep in the frame and what to leave out?
*When editing, how to we decide whether to remove an object, or when to add an element from another source?
*You are invited to post two versions of one of your images, and show us how the addition or deletion of an element, either by cropping or by Photoshop, changes the story of your image. Explain your work as much or as little as you like. Please follow along and respond to the submissions of others, whether you join in the submissions or not!
OTHER RESOURCES:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Kitchen_Maid
http://www.journeywithjesus.net/Essays/20140428JJ.shtml
http://www.nationalgallery.ie/en/Collection/Irelands_Favourite_Painting/Vermeer_Final/Final_Velazquez.aspx
http://www.artic.edu/aic/collections/artwork/21934?search_no=1&index=0
We ask that you to share your thoughts about these two nearly identical artworks, and invite you to post two different versions of one of your images, where the way you present the image changes the story.
Diego Velazquez was a 17th century Spanish court painter. He is considered one of the great masters of Western art. These two paintings are the same but very different. The Mulata, which hangs in the Chicago Art Institute, is a portrait of a kitchen worker absorbed in her chores. The second, Kitchen Maid at Emmaus, which hangs in the National Gallery of Ireland, tells an entirely different story: while the kitchen worker takes up almost the same amount of space in the same area of the canvas, and has the same contextual setting, there is another subject: the seated figures in the back room, shown in the upper left corner, change everything. No longer a painting of an unknown servant in an unknown kitchen, this becomes a painting of Jesus having dinner at Emmaus with his companions. We know this story, and that changes even what we think about the kitchen maid.
KEY QUESTIONS TO CONSIDER:
*Do you like one painting more than the other?
*Why?
*Why do you think the artist may have created these two?
*Do you deliberately change the story in your photographs by what you include/exclude?
*Is it right or wrong to add or delete subject matter in a photograph by cropping/framing?
*Is it right or wrong to add or delete subject matter in a photography using software?
*How much control should the image-maker exert on the story he/she is telling?
*Is that control different when considering different kinds of art? (photography vs painting for example)
OTHER QUESTIONS FOR DEEPER PARTICIPATION:
*When shooting, how do we decide what to keep in the frame and what to leave out?
*When editing, how to we decide whether to remove an object, or when to add an element from another source?
*You are invited to post two versions of one of your images, and show us how the addition or deletion of an element, either by cropping or by Photoshop, changes the story of your image. Explain your work as much or as little as you like. Please follow along and respond to the submissions of others, whether you join in the submissions or not!
OTHER RESOURCES:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Kitchen_Maid
http://www.journeywithjesus.net/Essays/20140428JJ.shtml
http://www.nationalgallery.ie/en/Collection/Irelands_Favourite_Painting/Vermeer_Final/Final_Velazquez.aspx
http://www.artic.edu/aic/collections/artwork/21934?search_no=1&index=0
http://2.bp.blogspot.com/-wNccf1bAlSA/VToRHK2CVaI/AAAAAAAAA-Q/-47jsFSXdOU/s1600/mulatre.tiff
May 1, 2016 22:09:29 #
Minnie, thank you for another stimulating discussion thread. The variety you've presented in these series is just awesome!
I dont know the story of Jesus at Emmaus. The figures are so small and with that frame, to me it just appears to be a painting on the wall. The second image is less appealing than the first because the subject feels crowded and the space more cluttered.
Regarding your questions on framing, cropping and editing, for me its about artistic expression. If the image is not presented as documentary, then whatever achieves your vision and the story you wish to tell is A-OK.
However...if an addition or deletion to the work significantly alters the perception of the viewer as to the photographers experience at time of shooting, then I feel its a deception and I dont like it.
Weve had conversations in this vein before and its been pointed out that just making a blue sky bluer or cloning out a piece of trash alters the viewers perception; but I am talking about significant changes, e.g. presenting a photo of an eagle sitting on your arm as a something that spontaneously happened in the wild when it actually took place at a raptor rehab center and youve cloned out the straps on the eagle's legs. Yes, an extreme example to make my point :)
I dont know the story of Jesus at Emmaus. The figures are so small and with that frame, to me it just appears to be a painting on the wall. The second image is less appealing than the first because the subject feels crowded and the space more cluttered.
Regarding your questions on framing, cropping and editing, for me its about artistic expression. If the image is not presented as documentary, then whatever achieves your vision and the story you wish to tell is A-OK.
However...if an addition or deletion to the work significantly alters the perception of the viewer as to the photographers experience at time of shooting, then I feel its a deception and I dont like it.
Weve had conversations in this vein before and its been pointed out that just making a blue sky bluer or cloning out a piece of trash alters the viewers perception; but I am talking about significant changes, e.g. presenting a photo of an eagle sitting on your arm as a something that spontaneously happened in the wild when it actually took place at a raptor rehab center and youve cloned out the straps on the eagle's legs. Yes, an extreme example to make my point :)
May 1, 2016 22:10:43 #
I carefully framed this as you see it, so I dont have a companion shot to post. In this instance the compelling story for me was not a literal cute swan family that includes the parents full bodies, but something more emotional: though they are tiny and vulnerable, these swanlets are safe and protected by the substantial forms of their parents.
May 1, 2016 22:20:06 #
Two stories.
A man by himself in a bar at lunchtime. Does he come here every day? Why is he without companions? Do you think hes alone and you feel sad for him, or is he enjoying a much deserved quiet respite from his stressful work day?
(Download)
But it turns out hes not all alone at the bar! Here is a tantalizing glimpse of a woman. Do you wonder if shes interested in this man, is she looking at him, does she come here every day like he does, or is this the first time theyve shared this space? Who sat down first, and does it matter, particularly regarding the spacing between them? And most important...what do you suppose happened after I took the picture :)
(Download)
May 2, 2016 04:46:46 #
The story behind the original intrigues me min. Is the Jesus scene supposed to be reality, a picture on the wall or a dream?
The whole bit about the painter returning to the same scene to improve his technique does not add up. Perhaps he had a mentor like ol' Chamin, full of good ideas lol.
A painter surely hones his skill on the next project not by producing duplicates. Art experts seem to agree on nothing other than to disagree so can probably be discounted.
Why if its reality is the serving wench dressed in 17th century wenching kit?
There are many jokes about the Irish not always being the sharpest knives in the drawer so I reckon the copy in the NGI is a fake and the Irish got stuffed yet again.
Maybe a 17th century Frank added the extra bit and invented the genre of adding articles to images
The whole bit about the painter returning to the same scene to improve his technique does not add up. Perhaps he had a mentor like ol' Chamin, full of good ideas lol.
A painter surely hones his skill on the next project not by producing duplicates. Art experts seem to agree on nothing other than to disagree so can probably be discounted.
Why if its reality is the serving wench dressed in 17th century wenching kit?
There are many jokes about the Irish not always being the sharpest knives in the drawer so I reckon the copy in the NGI is a fake and the Irish got stuffed yet again.
Maybe a 17th century Frank added the extra bit and invented the genre of adding articles to images
May 2, 2016 05:23:10 #
You just gotta laugh. An alternative view
In this image the young lady has just been told that some folks pay attention to what duChamin has to say and even wait eagerly for his next words of wisdom.
(Download)
Now the story is all about the little boy. Is he a fan of duChamin himself is he embarrassed by the woman's behavior. Is the intellectual plane upon which this young man lives so advanced that he just fails to comprehend how anyone cannot appreciate a true photography Messiah? Or is he just bored?
(Download)
May 2, 2016 07:09:21 #
Heather Iles
Loc: UK, Somerset
Billyspad wrote:
You just gotta laugh. An alternative view
Good one Billyspad! I like it a lot. You are not so dumb either. No offence meant of course.
May 2, 2016 07:15:02 #
Heather Iles wrote:
Good one Billyspad! I like it a lot. You are not so dumb either. No offence meant of course.
None taken I assure you Heather. I hope all is well with you and yours and your not too cold down there in the West.
May 2, 2016 07:21:50 #
Heather Iles
Loc: UK, Somerset
Billyspad wrote:
None taken I assure you Heather. I hope all is well with you and yours and your not too cold down there in the West.
It is a Bank Holiday. What do you expect, but at least the sun is out today shining brightly, but where is that blue sky? Not here, unfortunately.
May 2, 2016 08:35:42 #
Linda From Maine wrote:
Minnie, thank you for another stimulating discussi... (show quote)
The boundaries between the artistic and documentary are so confounding for photographers, and so much less so for artists in traditional media. I recently posted a swamp shot which some folks thought needed a bird or a boat or something else to draw interest, so I added a bird. It always feels a little odd to me when I do that because I know that bird wasn't there. But he might have been there some other day, though it doesn't really matter since I'm not entering it into any competition or trying to pass it off as documentary. These confounding thoughts may drive much of the argument about SOOC and editing...
May 2, 2016 08:42:11 #
Linda From Maine wrote:
I carefully framed this as you see it, so I dont have a companion shot to post. In this instance the compelling story for me was not a literal cute swan family that includes the parents full bodies, but something more emotional: though they are tiny and vulnerable, these swanlets are safe and protected by the substantial forms of their parents.
And this makes a wonderful composition, conveying exactly what you describe, the adorable babies, with the protective parent's form suggested and the tale told in scale. Excellent choice of framing.
May 2, 2016 08:42:50 #
Linda From Maine wrote:
Two stories.
Just the hint of the woman's knee changes everything doesn't it?:)
May 2, 2016 08:48:36 #
Billyspad wrote:
The story behind the original intrigues me min. Is... (show quote)
There was once speculation that the Chicago version was a copy by someone else. Though more is known now with modern analysis, there is still enough mystery to keep the interest of people who thrive on this kind of research. Of course the times were rife with religious paintings and a young up and coming painter would be required to join in. The really interesting thing about this set is how differently the kitchen maid is perceived in the two. And how we may do something of the same when we remove or introduce outside elements from/into a composition.
May 2, 2016 08:50:52 #
Billyspad wrote:
You just gotta laugh. An alternative view
The little boy does add a contrasting element to the lady. But I was hoping you'd share one of your remarkable composites to show us how these things are done in the 21st century.
May 2, 2016 09:40:26 #
minniev wrote:
The little boy does add a contrasting element to the lady. But I was hoping you'd share one of your remarkable composites to show us how these things are done in the 21st century.
Dentist tomorrow so not gonna promise but will try for you min.
If you want to reply, then register here. Registration is free and your account is created instantly, so you can post right away.