Secret Knowledge (New and Expanded Edition): Rediscovering the Lost Techniques of the Old Masters...

Secret Knowledge (New and Expanded Edition): Rediscovering the Lost Techniques of the Old Masters | David Hockney | Giving copies to friends

books:

Secret Knowledge (...

	Secret Knowledge (New and Expanded Edition): Rediscovering the Lost Techniques of the Old Masters David Hockney Studio, 2006 - 336 pages average customer review:based on 65 reviews view larger image
	for more information click here

David Hockney?s controversial book, now revised in paperback with thirty-two new pages of evidence

Join one of the most influential artists of our time as he investigates the painting techniques of the Old Masters. Hockney?s extensive research led him to conclude that artists such as Caravaggio, Velázquez, da Vinci, and other hyperrealists actually used optics and lenses to create their masterpieces.

In this passionate yet pithy book, Hockney takes readers on a journey of discovery as he builds a case that mirrors and lenses were used by the great masters to create their highly detailed and realistic paintings and drawings. Hundreds of the best-known and best-loved paintings are reproduced alongside his straightforward analysis. Hockney also includes his own photographs and drawings to illustrate techniques used to capture such accurate likenesses. Extracts from historical and modern documents and correspondence with experts from around the world further illuminate this thought-provoking book that will forever change how the world looks at art.

Secret Knowledge will open your eyes to how we perceive the world and how we choose to represent it.

for more information click here

Very interesting

Despite some negative reviews here, I thought this was a good book, and I find Hockney's theory quite credible, due to a study I did some time ago.

Twenty years ago, I wrote what was probably the most detailed analysis of perspective and visual distortions in van Gogh's famous painting, Bedroom at Arles. The research showed that the visual system can create several spatial distortions in a painting if the painter fails to map out a precise perspective. These deviations from geometric perspective--such as exaggerating the perceived sizes of objects in the foreground (to about 20 feet away from the observer), minimizing the sizes of objects in the distance, and the famous overall hyperbolic distortion of the human visual field, were clearly demostrable using standard perspective analysis, especially using the advanced techiques that I learned from Dubery and Willits's fine book on the subject.

I wasn't the first to note them, as these distortions have been noted by many observers and discussed by the great John Ward and Patrick Heelan in their journal articles in The Art Bulletin on the same painting, but no one had done the full quantitative analysis yet or linked them to the visual neurobiology. In addition, van Gogh also showed a spiral or torsional twist in some paintings that suggested something further in the way of physiological optics going on or perhaps even something neurological.

Through close obsevation of the real world, the great artists are aware of many of these problems, and how difficult it is to paint perspective precisely, and ever since my earlier study I've always suspected that Hockney's hypothesis was correct, I just didn't have the data myself, since I was working in a somewhat different field of perceived visual distortions in paintings that result from the operation of the human visual system itself.

So Hockney's thesis seems very plausible to me. I note one very negative review, but based on my own investigations, I think Hockney is probably right. Various geometric drawing devices and optical projective devices were available to the artists of old, and it's very likely that at least some, and perhaps many of them, used them as integral aids in their painting. Furthermore, there is the obvious case of anamorphic art in the Baroque period, where artists were known to have used optical devices to paint pictures that couldn't even be understood without the use of cyclindrical mirrors.

I found Hockney's book well written and a very interesting read. I think he did a great job on it and I learned a lot myself.

for more information click here

Giving copies to friends

Secret Knowledge: Rediscovering the Lost Techniques of the Old Masters

This book researches and explains the methods used by the old masters to achieve beautiful results in their realistic paintings. A must read. I buy it as gifts to educate my friends, artist & non artist alike. Cynthia

A worthwhile contribution by David Hockney

Many reviews have questioned the value of this book, and it's true that this book might not be very interesting to the general reader or hobbyist painter. However what fault of that rests on Hockney's shoulders? The rest of the negative reviews seem to center around some imagined insult by Hockney of old master techniques. I found none of that in this book. My criticism tend toward the amateurish nature of Hockney's argument, but then again he is an amateur. The real gravitates of this book lies for me in what it could mean for modern painting.

There are many artists who draw with a "sharp focus" realistic technique today, but they don't rate very high as artists because philosophically they've yet made much of a case for themselves. Far from being a put down of the old masters as so many of the other negative reviews allege it actually opens new vistas for modern painters by challenging some the prevailing beliefs about painting and the effect photography has had upon it. Modern movie technology is the logical outcome of the artistic visions many old masters if the thesis of this book holds (and granted that is still an if) not Matisse, de kooning or Jasper Johns.

Modern painting has been driven by it's status as unique material object and the economic consequences of that are implied by a painting's rarity. David Hockney's book suggests how a realistic style of painting in an age of photographic reproduction may once again find a successful argument.

In fact it successfully reframes non representational painting in a new, less appealing and somewhat juvenile, light. It's only a shame that Hockney wasn't a more polished academic and could have presented us a book with a more forceful argument.

for more information click here

too much words

quality of pictures is good,but words are too much,
it is different to read,

reviews: page 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10

products you might be interested in