Hacker News Reader

Comment by thecupisblue | Hacker News Reader

I always heard about Caravaggio from books and Internet, finding his paintings "ok, realistic, cool for the time, skilfully made".

Then I saw a few live. The chiaroscuro theatre of shadow and light, the insane details, the dynamic of each painting, the mastery it takes to reproduce such art pieces, it all humbled me as an artist in a way I did not expect. This man had such an insane talent, vision and skill to produce some of these paintings, their harshness matching his lifestyle.

If you have a chance to see some of his works in person, go for it, it will definitely pay off.

View on HN

Had to make an account just to reply that I had a similar experience with Thomas Cole. Saw a showing of “Course of Empire” and was astonished. Looking at a photo can’t prepare you for the impact of a wall-sized painting crammed with magnifying glass-sized details.

monitors also do not reproduce much color spectrum that is apparent in painting situated in a room

This. I had the same feeling on seeing The Triumph of Death by Pieter Bruegel the Elder in the Prado. [0] It's one thing to see the painting in a book. It's another thing to turn the corner into a room and see the full 20 square foot landscape in front of you. (It's still one of my favorite paintings of all time.)

[0] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Triumph_of_Death

Yes you are describing my experience exactly. This art is one of those arts that looks nice in photos and is just impactful (?) in person. Like, movingly painted somehow? It is emotionally arresting. He has captured something of the human spirit in some of his work.

Well said.

the insane details

Really? I get the exact opposite impression - how little actual detail there is. It seems it almost completely consists of few thick brushstrokes, made with insane precision.

The Supper at Emmaus seems to be an exception. It makes me think it actually isn't his painting.

Reply on news.ycombinator.com