Post-Conference Overview
Hockney and Falco claim that artists use of optics as explains the ‘optical look’ that appeared in paintings after about 1430. As supporting evidence, they show that many paintings reveal different vanishing points in different regions, compatible with th
I show several lines of contrary evidence, implying that Renaissance artists constructed their compositions purely through artistic intuition, without optical aids (or accurate geometric methods).
1. Most Renaissance artists show perspective discrepancies within local regions, refuting an accurate use of optics.
2. Construction lines reveal the use of geometric perspective.
3. Even if the optics were moved, all vanishing points should still lie in the horizon, a requirement violated among the discrepant vanishing points observed.
4. Optical aids such as mirrors and lenses are not photographs; they cannot explain the ability to capture elements in motion such as rearing horses.
5. The Hockney/Falco/Graves demonstrations reveal that optical projection has a very narrow depth of field. The ‘optical look’ therefore should include many regions being painted out of focus. No Renaissance paintings exhibit the literal optical look of
6. Falco’s “Rosetta Stone” of Lotto’s ‘Santa Lucia’ does not have a unified geometry of its central pattern element, even though apparent blurring implies a single optical projection zone. The perspective is locally haphazard, and is compatible only with
| Previous slide | Next slide | Back to first slide | View graphic version |