The removal of accretions can, in many cases, reveal much. For objects in churches, and also for the interior walls and ceilings of those buildings, candle soot/wax can be a major cause of discoloration and "darkening." This can be carefully removed, but the process does expose the underlying art to fresh "ravages" since the patina can offer some level of protection to the surface.
Artificial patinas are almost always recognizable as such, and can sometimes cause irreparable harm to the item to which one is trying to give the appearance of great age.
Given the unequal lighting of the images of the station you posted, it is not easy to make a good comparison.
That is not a fair comparison as the two paintings you show are not the same. The shape of the mountain in the background are different,the colors of the robes are different, and the hand gestures are different. I do tend to prefer works of this type when the patina is removed. It takes much more than the dark veil of dirt to make a Chiaroscuro painting,these are not Chiaroscuro paintings. The painters that painted the pictures you show paid good money for those bright pigments. Those colors often were expensive.
Removal of a natural heavy patina while leaving a trace behind to protect the paint colors is good. Adding a fake patina to age a work of art should only be done to cheap resin pieces that are sold as home devotionals to those who can't afford the real thing. (Like me! ;D)
"Why hasn't Mr. McCarrick been kicked out the rectory in Kansas? Why is a disgraced layman living in a rectory?"
Why hasn't he been kicked out?
"Tax collectors and sinners were all drawing near to listen to Jesus, but the Pharisees and scribes began to complain, saying, 'This man welcomes sinners and eats with them.'" (Luke 15:1)
7 comments:
The removal of accretions can, in many cases, reveal much. For objects in churches, and also for the interior walls and ceilings of those buildings, candle soot/wax can be a major cause of discoloration and "darkening." This can be carefully removed, but the process does expose the underlying art to fresh "ravages" since the patina can offer some level of protection to the surface.
Artificial patinas are almost always recognizable as such, and can sometimes cause irreparable harm to the item to which one is trying to give the appearance of great age.
Given the unequal lighting of the images of the station you posted, it is not easy to make a good comparison.
That is not a fair comparison as the two paintings you show are not the same. The shape of the mountain in the background are different,the colors of the robes are different, and the hand gestures are different. I do tend to prefer works of this type when the patina is removed. It takes much more than the dark veil of dirt to make a Chiaroscuro painting,these are not Chiaroscuro paintings. The painters that painted the pictures you show paid good money for those bright pigments. Those colors often were expensive.
Removal of a natural heavy patina while leaving a trace behind to protect the paint colors is good. Adding a fake patina to age a work of art should only be done to cheap resin pieces that are sold as home devotionals to those who can't afford the real thing. (Like me! ;D)
Why hasn't Mr. McCarrick been kicked out the rectory in Kansas? Why is a disgraced layman living in a rectory?
"Why hasn't Mr. McCarrick been kicked out the rectory in Kansas? Why is a disgraced layman living in a rectory?"
Why hasn't he been kicked out?
"Tax collectors and sinners were all drawing near to listen to Jesus,
but the Pharisees and scribes began to complain, saying,
'This man welcomes sinners and eats with them.'" (Luke 15:1)
Bee here:
Friendly reminder: don't feed the Anonymous (at September 15, 2019 at 6:26 AM) Troll.
God bless.
Bee
Friendly reminder - Thanks for the comment, Bee.
Also, it is far easier to pretend to disregard the messenger than to acknowledge the truth of the message itself.
Post a Comment