cunning steps, putting 27 for 50, 30 for 70, and reserving some force
still for the last 90 to 100. So Rembrandt modifies his system on the
other side, putting his 40 for 100, his 30 for 90, his 20 for 80; then
going subtly downwards, 10 for 50, 5 for 30; nearly everything between
30 and zero being lost in gloom, yet so as still to reserve his zero for
zero. The systems expressed in tabular form will stand thus:--
NATURE. REMBRANDT. TURNER. VERONESE.
0 0 0 0
10 1 10 10
20 3 20 20
30 5 24 30
40 7 26 32
50 10 27 34
60 13 28 36
70 17 30 37
80 20 32 38
90 30 36 39
100 40 40 40
Sec. 12. Now it is evident that in Rembrandt's system, while the
_contrasts_ are not more right than with Veronese, the _colors_ are all
wrong, from beginning to end. With Turner and Veronese, Nature's 10 is
their 10, and Nature's 20 their 20; enabling them to give pure truth up
to a certain point. But with Rembrandt _not one color_ is absolutely
true, from one side of the scale to the other; only the contrasts are
true at the top of the scale. Of course, this supposes Rembrandt's
system applied to a subject which shall try it to the utmost, such as
landscape. Rembrandt generally chose subjects in which the real colors
were very nearly imitable,--as single heads with dark backgrounds, in
which Nature's highest light was little above his own; her 40 being then
truly representable by his 40, his picture became nearly an absolute
truth. But his system is only right when applied to such subjects:
clearly, when we have the full scale of natural light to deal with,
Turner's and Veronese's convey the greatest sum of truth. But not the
most complete deception, for people are so much more easily and
instinctively impressed by force of light than truth of color, that they
instantly miss the relative power of the sky, and the upper tones; and
all the true local coloring looks strange to them, separated from its
adjuncts of high light; whereas, give them the true contrast of light,
and they will not observe the false local color. Thus all Gaspar
Poussin's and Salvator's pictures, and all effects obtained by leaving
high lights in the midst of exaggerated darkness, catch the eye, and are
received for true, while the pure truth of Veronese and Turner is
rejected as unnatural; only not so much in Veronese's case as in
Turner's, because Veronese confines himself to more imitable things, as
draperies, figures, and architecture, in which his exquisite truth at
the bottom of the scale tells on the eye at once; but Turner works a
good deal also (see the table) at the _top_ of the natural scale,
Public-domain text, read in full here on John Shaqi.
Reviews
Reviews
No reviews yet
Be the first to share your thoughts on this work.
Join the Discussion
Join the discussion
Sign in to leave a comment or review.
Sign InorCreate an account