LOVE this guy! The conversations you have with Micah are my favorite episodes. The passion he has for the artists he discusses is infectious! Thank you for bringing the art community such interesting and educational topics. I always learn great things.

The episodes with Dr. Christensen are just the best

Two moments into this podcast and I can’t help putting a vote in for Mr Christensen’s dapper dressing. Love it. So gentlemanly stylish. I feel I’m attending a lecture at a fashionable nineteenth century art academy. Brilliant.

Another GREAT podcast! I love “geeking out” over the details! You two work well together. Thank you for these episodes!

Another great Micah podcast. your give and take with him go beyond any other podcast that I've listened to.

I just discovered this channel and I LOVE IT! Binge watching all videos soon

I love the Micah talks

I live for these episodes thanks so much

The most valuable discussion on Vermeer that I've heard. Thank you.

These podcasts are the best! I actually search out the ones with you and Micah! Please do more, would you consider discussing John William Godward, Frederic Lord Leighton, or John William Waterhouse? Love getting the insight from present day artists too. Please keep doing these. Thank you!

love these.

Valuables insights I got from Verneers execution and design sense

Good talk about Vermeer, a truly amazing artist. Micah is always informative and interesting. Several years ago I read an article in the New Yorker magazine about the whole theory of the camera obscura and whether Vermeer used one. Jeff is right, it's interesting to talk about and think about but ultimately there's a lot more to painting than that. Contrary to what Micah said, I don't think anyone made an argument that using a camera obscura meant that anyone could do it. Today people have access to projectors and lots of people use them and make bad paintings. The camera obscura was a tool that became available around that time and may have been used. As a tool. As I was listening I thought that one might take a walk through museums in Florence and see gigantic murals on the walls and ceilings and a non-artist would think that it was miraculous that an artist could paint figures and animals and objects so large and lifelike. Then you might explain that the artist would do detailed drawings much smaller and then make a grid and then transfer the drawing to large paper or canvas and poke holes in the large drawing and transfer the drawing with charcoal to make large outlines for the mural. A non-artist artist might think that's cheating and say that anyone could do that. Then just ask them to show us. It's a many faceted, complicated process to create a painting, and we have many tools in our quiver. It's how you use them that really counts.

Great podcast. I am currently doing value studies of several of Vermeer's paintings and quite a few questions have come up about the how and why of his works and working method. This podcast gave me some information that helps clarify his method and offer interesting ideas to try in my own work. Lots to think about.

Another minor correction; Vermeer's "The Art of Painting" s almost 4 feet high, not 27 inches.

Nice discussion. Girl with a Pearl Earring is so well known and my favorite.

I don't think any fair watching of "Tim's Vermeer" could come to the conclusion that Tim Jenison is in any way concluding that making a Vermeer painting is "easy." He spends YEARS of his life in the movie trying to backwards-engineer the process that may or may not have been used. He has a specific expertise that he brings to bear (optical imaging), and he clearly LOVES Vermeer's work, and has enormous respect for the artist, however the works were made. He never says that his "copy" is "as good" or that he thinks anyone could replicate it. In fact, the movie isn't even really about Vermeer at all - it's an exploration of the kind of obsessive mind that is really, really good at problem-solving. Which clearly Vermeer was, and Tim is as well. Game recognize game.

How did Vermeer manage to paint himself from behind in the last painting discussed at length? A model, a mannequin or. .....the use of 2 mirrors. This idea was never raised in the discussion. Please see the 2 videos by Nigel Konstam where I paint a demonstration using this method. A very interesting discussion anyway, thankyou to you both. ~Anne Shingleton

My fav guest! Would love his take on Repin

Some artists i would love to hear you and Mr.Micah to have a conversation on if ever possible ( Repin, Bertha weggman, adolph Menzil or honestly anybody) love this show 💯 best podcast on Art

This first painting is quite large I think. It’s in Scotland.

This conversation makes me thing about modern conversations having to do with girds and projectors. Using these technologies can definitely assist in making a painting, but it in no way guarantees a good or high-quality final result. I always find it ironic that most of the best draftsman out there have systems like triangulation, using a plum line, sight size, etc. they have developed where they are basically taking measurements to be accurate in their drawing. This is in no way a criticism of them, but I think gridding, projecting, and using a camera obscura are valid techniques to achieve this as well. You still have to make "art" out of whatever it is you are painting, and that requires an entirely different and much more advanced skillset than producing an accurate outline.

Micah, you rule ! :)

Maybe I missed it, but which web site are you visiting to view these images in such high resolution? thank you kindly.

Minor correction for Mr. Christensen; Vermeer didn't live into his fifties. He was born in 1932, and died in 1675, at age 43.

Great talk. Just a suggestion...keep the cursor off the screen unless it's needed. thanks.

Hahaha if my grandchildren try to examine my paintings in the future, they will not find any drawings… chalk on canvas or light paint sketch for stickman base. 😂At least that accounts for my painting errors. The Hobbyist artist (KS)

I doubt the notion that Vermeer got the idea of pointillism from looking through mechanical devices such as the camera obscura. When one looks at the ground glass of a large format camera-a modern device with sharp optics-one is unlikely to see a point light aberration effect, as what is visible is a continuous spatial span of light, not points, especially in an interior setting like those Vermeer painted. On the other hand, whether Vermeer used a camera obscura is really a distraction. Given his artistry and skill level, as passionately described by Micah Christensen, the contribution of the camera obscura to his works, if he actually used one, should be considered limited, perhaps in improving perspective and proportion, similar to the grid system, but significantly less than the 75% suggested at times during the interview. The shades and colors, and the way he painted them, contribute greatly to achieving the realistic photographic effect, especially the depth of space in his paintings.

Shirt and tie dude, please, please allow the artist to complete a sentence. Please! I want to hear the artist’s evaluation.

Oh no, someone has a differing opinion and conclusion than me.... "it needs to be aggressively destroyed". Yeah, lets not discuss Hockney's hypothesis and where his arguments are weak, lets just cancel him. Good lord.