Louis van Tilborgh, curator of research at the Van Gogh Museum in Amsterdam, said the painting was unusual for the 19th century impressionist, depicting large human figures in a landscape. Museum De Fundatie
Louis van Tilborgh, curator of research at the Van Gogh Museum in Amsterdam, said the painting was unusual for the 19th century impressionist, depicting large human figures in a landscape. Museum De Fundatie
Good one, Vincent...
Thanks for posting this. I love Van Gogh. He’s my favorite painter.
How many watts did the windmill produce?
To see his paintings in person is astounding. On some of his paintings the paint is so thick it actually sticks out in three D. The blossoms on the cherry tree look like you could pick them.
- gotta gogh??
ping of interest devolve
Very nice!
I was thinking that the value of art by a culture seems to reflect an overall sytem of values and a depth of human value . For example: African art has almost zero monetary value, but that Van Gogh will fetch multi millions.
Will the Art of today's moderrn culture have value in the future ?
I have an African mask with hundreds of hours work in it with beads and seashells stitched on, woven grass, and spotted leopard skin. My uncle got it in the Congo in 1959 when he was a Mobil Oil bush pilot. It is quite beautiful. The local galleries in los Angeles are not interested and it wouldn't even fetch $25 on E-bay last time I tried. I also have a worthless carved head in hardwood very well done and a copper relief wall hanging , all worthless art from Africa. You would think someone from that culture would find value in those art items from at least 50 years ago
And another one. The faces are featureless, as in the newly-authenticated one.
Here's the EXACT same scene as the new one. Again, different color palette. The new one just doesn't look like a Van Gogh color palette to me.
All of the paintings I'm looking at are from 1886, the year the authenticator says the new one is from. Perhaps Van Gogh and a fellow artist went out painting one day, and painted the same scene. Or, he and another artist painted the same scene separately. As much as I like the painting, it just doesn't look like Van Gogh's color palette to me.
I've seen these authenticators make mistakes before.
And when did Van Gogh ever paint women's dresses that way? And why isn't the painting signed? Just because it's stamped from an art store that Van Gogh went to, and it uses some of the same pigments - that doesn't necessarily mean it's by Van Gogh. More likely, a fellow artist.
Read his biography, what he was doing in 1886. He was working with a group of artists. The painting is more than likely the work of one of them.
See if you can find Van Gogh among the dozens of artists.
I think it was one of these other artists who painted the painting that has been ascribed to Van Gogh. Because, really, when did you ever see Van Gogh paint women's dresses so colorfully, and with such a light touch?
