I guess what fires me up in Miller's snide remarks about my comments on Manet's Bar at the Folies Bergere, is that have actually studied the work, and its x-rays, and the collateral materials, and arrived at proposals in collaboration with highly respected scholars and then published my views in extremely credible sources. Cambridge press was one of the best art publishers in the world; Critical Inquiry is probably the most respected scholarly quarterly. Now Miller proposes a test, with no guidelines, the aim of which is to ridicule my application of perspective to Manet's painting. I applied perspective to the painting as a sort of dissecting tool, to uncover and help explain te complexity of the composition, NOT to argue that Manet employed perspective, except "implicitly".When Miller can get his ideas past the expert vetters and get them published in stringent journals and books, I'll calm down a bit and pay attention to him. For now, I can only say he's well out of his depth on this topic. wc
----- Original Message ---- From: Chris Miller <[email protected]> To: [email protected] Sent: Thu, October 29, 2009 12:38:56 PM Subject: Re: Art and Optics Assuming that everyone here has something like Photoshop on their computer, here's a fun exercise for our group: 1. Download an image of Manet's "Folies Bergere" 2. Put a red dot wherever you see an "implicit vanishing point" 3. Email that image to me, and I'll put them all up on a webpage 4. Then we can compare them all with the ones that William has found. Do you think they will all be the same? If they are different -- how might we prove which, if any, are correct? If such a proof can be convincingly made -- those who were wrong may then ask themselves if they can see the work better after knowing where the real vp's can be found. (BTW -- I can't take the test, because I have no idea how implicit vanishing points can be found, and certainly cant find any in that painting) >By implicit vp in Manet's painting, I refer to the multiple vps in the work, none of which organizes the whole painting but only sections, implying that when one looks at a section it is organized to a vp but when one looks elsewhere in the painting, another vp takes over, that contradicts the other, and so on. Actually there are many vanishing points in the painting and they tell you where your eye level is and what your position is vis-a-vis the painting. wc ____________________________________________________________ Diet Help Cheap Diet Help Tips. Click here. http://thirdpartyoffers.netzero.net/TGL2231/c?cp=sT4Yr4G_LdkXuqC8MzryTgAAJz6c l_zTaptgNR5c8Mer1v9kAAYAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAADNAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAYQAAAAAA=
