The editor who posted this file wrote at the time Interiors of the Winter Palace. The Alexander Hall / 1861 / Edward Hau / Watercolour. This may be a little cryptic, but it seems clear that what was meant was that this is a watercolour painted by one Edward Hau in 1861.
Googling takes one
here, thence
here, and thence
the picture. Bingo. J'accuse Giano of omitting the patronymic; this is not Edward Hau (who sounds like a Hong Kong businessman) but Edward Petrovich Hau, and he painted it in 1861. We have the word of arthermitage.org for this. It's not clear that arthermitage.org is an official site, Arthermitage.org is not the official site and it does carry ads; but it also seems carefully put together. Surely we can accept that this is a reproduction of an 1861 painting by Edward Petrovich Hau; at least until somebody provides evidence suggesting that such a claim is untrue.
So much for the source. Now for the reproduction. Who photographed the painting? Who printed from the negative (or slide)? Who scanned the print or slide? Who removed the grit, balanced the color, etc.? Did Giano get the result from arthermitage.org or from somewhere else? I don't know, and it seems we don't have to worry about any of these matters, because the file page also tells us:
'Nuff said? -- Hoary ( talk) 01:56, 25 March 2009 (UTC) [... altered Hoary ( talk) 02:58, 25 March 2009 (UTC)
The editor who posted this file wrote at the time Interiors of the Winter Palace. The Alexander Hall / 1861 / Edward Hau / Watercolour. This may be a little cryptic, but it seems clear that what was meant was that this is a watercolour painted by one Edward Hau in 1861.
Googling takes one
here, thence
here, and thence
the picture. Bingo. J'accuse Giano of omitting the patronymic; this is not Edward Hau (who sounds like a Hong Kong businessman) but Edward Petrovich Hau, and he painted it in 1861. We have the word of arthermitage.org for this. It's not clear that arthermitage.org is an official site, Arthermitage.org is not the official site and it does carry ads; but it also seems carefully put together. Surely we can accept that this is a reproduction of an 1861 painting by Edward Petrovich Hau; at least until somebody provides evidence suggesting that such a claim is untrue.
So much for the source. Now for the reproduction. Who photographed the painting? Who printed from the negative (or slide)? Who scanned the print or slide? Who removed the grit, balanced the color, etc.? Did Giano get the result from arthermitage.org or from somewhere else? I don't know, and it seems we don't have to worry about any of these matters, because the file page also tells us:
'Nuff said? -- Hoary ( talk) 01:56, 25 March 2009 (UTC) [... altered Hoary ( talk) 02:58, 25 March 2009 (UTC)