![]() | A fact from The Thinker: Portrait of Louis N. Kenton appeared on Wikipedia's
Main Page in the
Did you know column on 30 September 2013 (
check views). The text of the entry was as follows:
| ![]() |
![]() | This article is rated B-class on Wikipedia's
content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
.... on an interesting DYK!
I don't know that the above passage gets at what's going actually on here. The Velazquez, unlike this painting, has the contours of the black clothes clearly defined against the background. There is another crucial difference in that the face of "the Thinker" is turned down, partly shadowed and less arresting because it lacks the contrast of the commanding black eyes in the pale face. The whole left side of Kenton's face (right side as viewed) has become a mid-tone, and therefore closer in tone to the background and less in contrast than the black suit against the background. A sharp edge on the suit would have made the body stand forward more than it does. The blurred edge negates this. Details of the clothing, where they are black against black or against cast shadow, are painting crisply. Apart from the face, the areas that are crisp are not so much those that are detailed as those that are light-reflective. He has painted all the highlights on the shoes, but been careful to keep them much less bright than the collar, so that although they contrast against the black, they don't grab attention. That watch-chain, pocket and cuff are really important in giving dimension to the body, just as the skirting board defines the form of the space. Similarly the glasses carry a plane across the face.
I would drop "to suggest atmosphere" because I don't think that is what it is about. It's about maintaining the most defined contrast in the right area.
Wonderful painting! Thanks for getting it to the front page.
Amandajm ( talk) 00:03, 1 October 2013 (UTC)
![]() | A fact from The Thinker: Portrait of Louis N. Kenton appeared on Wikipedia's
Main Page in the
Did you know column on 30 September 2013 (
check views). The text of the entry was as follows:
| ![]() |
![]() | This article is rated B-class on Wikipedia's
content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
.... on an interesting DYK!
I don't know that the above passage gets at what's going actually on here. The Velazquez, unlike this painting, has the contours of the black clothes clearly defined against the background. There is another crucial difference in that the face of "the Thinker" is turned down, partly shadowed and less arresting because it lacks the contrast of the commanding black eyes in the pale face. The whole left side of Kenton's face (right side as viewed) has become a mid-tone, and therefore closer in tone to the background and less in contrast than the black suit against the background. A sharp edge on the suit would have made the body stand forward more than it does. The blurred edge negates this. Details of the clothing, where they are black against black or against cast shadow, are painting crisply. Apart from the face, the areas that are crisp are not so much those that are detailed as those that are light-reflective. He has painted all the highlights on the shoes, but been careful to keep them much less bright than the collar, so that although they contrast against the black, they don't grab attention. That watch-chain, pocket and cuff are really important in giving dimension to the body, just as the skirting board defines the form of the space. Similarly the glasses carry a plane across the face.
I would drop "to suggest atmosphere" because I don't think that is what it is about. It's about maintaining the most defined contrast in the right area.
Wonderful painting! Thanks for getting it to the front page.
Amandajm ( talk) 00:03, 1 October 2013 (UTC)