Since this was filmed, The Met has determined that the full length portrait of Filipe II is a signed replica painted by Velasquez himself at the request of Don García Pérez de Araciel. It was paid for on 4 December 1624.
... what took them so long to reattribute this exceptional painting to Diego V. So called experts looked at this self-portrait daily and it took them decades to aknoledge its authenticity.. It is a celebration but also an indictment of the PHD system which produces academic drones . Do they look at paintings deeply? Can they.
Why do so many think of Velasquez as the best painter in history or of all time but aren't rembrandts portraits so much better? More lively and realistic, with more quality depth and detail used very efficiently? Aren't his paintings even more efficient, and simple yet complex?
Because he IS the BEST. His technique was superb and so brave, he didn't use layers and layers he just painted alla prima very often. There is a portrait in the Prado Museum. Is the portrait of Sebastian de Mora, one of the dwarves that worked at the Palace. The portrait is superb in all senses but, the ear what I admire the most. If you look close, is just two red dots. Just that. But from a distance of one or two meters, is a perfect ear. That my friend, is the magic of Velázquez.
You are so right! I grew up seeing the portrait of Pope Innocent X almost on a daily basis. I lived very close to it. Never ceased to astonish me. Red still is my favorite color. How many shades and how many textures of red are possible? Infinite according to the great Velasquez.
Diego Visconti that portrait is amazing and such a brilliant psicological study of the subject. You can see the power, the ambition, maybe the cruelty... Is all in his face. The red tunic and the white veil on top are to die for. The technique is just unbelievable. Francis Bacon spent his whole life obsessed with that painting. I understand why.
Henry James used that portrait as the structure for "Daisy Miller." It is a magnificent work of art. Is there another portrait so compelling, so full of meaning, so profound, so psychologically charged as that one? My answer is no. Whatever Giovanni Battista Pamphilj was, as a cardinal and a pope (1644-1655), what Diego de Silva y Velasquez gives us is his view of power and purpose. Much has been said of Papa Innocenzo X, 99% incorrect. He gets bad reviews from many as he tried to maneuver the Barque of Peter among the shoals of Habsburgs and Bourbons. I think he did well, but I am biased. The importance here is what Velasquez gives us. And that is spectacularly beautiful! And while waiting for his appointments with Innocent X, Velasquez painted his aide, Juan de Pareja!!!! Can you beat that?
Umm... too bad, umm... the restorer, umm... doesn't have, umm... better, umm... speaking skills, umm... because I would have, umm... loved, umm... to have watched this, umm... whole, umm... thing, umm... but, his, umm... "Umm's," are, umm... driving me, umm... nuts. That said, thank you for giving us back a work by one of the all-time greatest artists.
I was rude, and I'm sorry. Mr. Gallagher is a very talented restorer, and after seeing another vid with him, I realize that he doesn't have a problem speaking one on one. It was probably nerves associated with having to speak in a lecture structure. (I don't care to speak infront of groups, either.) M. Gallagher, you did a wonderful job bringing this painting back to life. Thank you. I can't wait to see it in person... And touch it... And stroke it... And kiss it... And... No, I'll behave.
No one speaks that clearly without rehearsing first. People with the expectation of no ums are unrealistic and live in a fantasy land that somehow their idols are smarter than they when it's just an ear piece or teleprompter!
To compare painters of rare great skills and to make an evaluation who is better than the other I do not like because the inner beauty of a painting you find with many painters. And therefore no evaluation of the different personalities should be made.
the nerve of these restorers changing these pictures so much. no better than the paint-overs from the past, changing the paintings to modern taste. leave them alone and stop destroying the world's art to make it bright and clean
You think grimy, degraded varnish is part of the art? You think Velazquez wanted his painting to be seen through a yellow-brown cloud that developed long after he finished it? Cleaning and revarnishing would have been considered normal care in his day, too. The difference is that today's restorers are much better at it.
@Kelly Goodfellow: Fair enough, however did you notice in the 'before and after' around 18:00 in that the 'after' looks like they took away colour of the background with the cleaning? Sorry to say this, but a lot of cleaning up is extremely difficult to do just right. I'm not sure if any painting requires it, aside from how this artwork was recognisable as a Velazquez piece even when still 'dirty'.
Since this was filmed, The Met has determined that the full length portrait of Filipe II is a signed replica painted by Velasquez himself at the request of Don García Pérez de Araciel. It was paid for on 4 December 1624.
Thank you for posting that- I was thinking the same thing after it was stated.
Velazquez, my all time favorite.
Thank you! Strong statement small yet huge in excutation, quoted.
Velazquez fue tan grande en su pintura com tan grande fue el empeño que realizó para alcanzar la fama y los honores.
Gorgeous portrait!
He was a great painter!
Thank you!
thanks for posting
I am deeply interested in V. very interesting
velazquez, a real painter
Captivating eyes
"Losing definition," a great descriptive observation
Hans Holbein wasn't a Dutch painter, but a German.
... what took them so long to reattribute this exceptional painting to Diego V.
So called experts looked at this self-portrait daily and it took them decades to aknoledge its authenticity.. It is a celebration but also an indictment of the PHD system which produces academic drones . Do they look at paintings deeply? Can they.
The title is me when I need to finish a 2000 word essay in two hours
Very Impressive
Why do so many think of Velasquez as the best painter in history or of all time
but aren't rembrandts portraits so much better? More lively and realistic, with more quality depth and detail used very efficiently?
Aren't his paintings even more efficient, and simple yet complex?
He is the greatest and Las Meninas is his masterpiece. Painting looking into itself.
Because he IS the BEST. His technique was superb and so brave, he didn't use layers and layers he just painted alla prima very often. There is a portrait in the Prado Museum. Is the portrait of Sebastian de Mora, one of the dwarves that worked at the Palace. The portrait is superb in all senses but, the ear what I admire the most. If you look close, is just two red dots. Just that. But from a distance of one or two meters, is a perfect ear. That my friend, is the magic of Velázquez.
You are so right! I grew up seeing the portrait of Pope Innocent X almost on a daily basis. I lived very close to it. Never ceased to astonish me. Red still is my favorite color. How many shades and how many textures of red are possible? Infinite according to the great Velasquez.
Diego Visconti that portrait is amazing and such a brilliant psicological study of the subject. You can see the power, the ambition, maybe the cruelty... Is all in his face. The red tunic and the white veil on top are to die for. The technique is just unbelievable. Francis Bacon spent his whole life obsessed with that painting. I understand why.
Henry James used that portrait as the structure for "Daisy Miller." It is a magnificent work of art. Is there another portrait so compelling, so full of meaning, so profound, so psychologically charged as that one? My answer is no. Whatever Giovanni Battista Pamphilj was, as a cardinal and a pope (1644-1655), what Diego de Silva y Velasquez gives us is his view of power and purpose. Much has been said of Papa Innocenzo X, 99% incorrect. He gets bad reviews from many as he tried to maneuver the Barque of Peter among the shoals of Habsburgs and Bourbons. I think he did well, but I am biased. The importance here is what Velasquez gives us. And that is spectacularly beautiful! And while waiting for his appointments with Innocent X, Velasquez painted his aide, Juan de Pareja!!!! Can you beat that?
What a wonderful self portrait. Those eyes wow.
was this recorded on a shoe?
Umm... too bad, umm... the restorer, umm... doesn't have, umm... better, umm... speaking skills, umm... because I would have, umm... loved, umm... to have watched this, umm... whole, umm... thing, umm... but, his, umm... "Umm's," are, umm... driving me, umm... nuts.
That said, thank you for giving us back a work by one of the all-time greatest artists.
I was rude, and I'm sorry. Mr. Gallagher is a very talented restorer, and after seeing another vid with him, I realize that he doesn't have a problem speaking one on one. It was probably nerves associated with having to speak in a lecture structure. (I don't care to speak infront of groups, either.) M. Gallagher, you did a wonderful job bringing this painting back to life. Thank you. I can't wait to see it in person... And touch it... And stroke it... And kiss it... And... No, I'll behave.
No one speaks that clearly without rehearsing first. People with the expectation of no ums are unrealistic and live in a fantasy land that somehow their idols are smarter than they when it's just an ear piece or teleprompter!
Clearly from a top historican
Too bad it's only 480p.
To compare painters of rare great skills and to make an evaluation who is better than the other I do not like because the inner beauty of a painting you find with many painters. And therefore no evaluation of the different personalities should be made.
O q matou o vídeo foi o narrador..
Or, offering portrayal given an hierarchical stature
Hands not easy, then again portraiture takes on gestural or quick sketch.
hahahahahaha hahahahahahahahahahahahaha One of the funniest things I have ever seen on RUclips!!! hahahahahahahaha You made my year!
Bravura technique. Nobody painted like Velasquez
Very Latino sentiment depiction
Longgated arms are distortion
Faved. :D
Labor intense
Good God, trying to listen to this narrator is TORTURE!
No it's not
the nerve of these restorers changing these pictures so much. no better than the paint-overs from the past, changing the paintings to modern taste. leave them alone and stop destroying the world's art to make it bright and clean
You think grimy, degraded varnish is part of the art? You think Velazquez wanted his painting to be seen through a yellow-brown cloud that developed long after he finished it? Cleaning and revarnishing would have been considered normal care in his day, too. The difference is that today's restorers are much better at it.
@Kelly Goodfellow: Fair enough, however did you notice in the 'before and after' around 18:00 in that the 'after' looks like they took away colour of the background with the cleaning? Sorry to say this, but a lot of cleaning up is extremely difficult to do just right. I'm not sure if any painting requires it, aside from how this artwork was recognisable as a Velazquez piece even when still 'dirty'.
The second speaker: ZZzzzzzz.... ZZzzzzzz.... ZZzzzzz....
Booooorrrrrrriiiiinnnnngggggg.... zzzzzzz zzzzzzz