While working on a commission two years ago, I looked at Canaletto's Bacino di San Marco, Looking East. Because it's in the permanent collection of the Museum of Fine Arts, Boston, it was convenient for me to go look at it in person. Here is a photo reproduction, from the Web Gallery of Art (https://www.wga.hu/art/c/canalett/5/canal512.jpg) (photo reproductions of 2-dimensional public-domain artworks are considered to be in the public domain in the United States, where I currently live and work):
I have a few thoughts on Canaletto, and I'd be interested to get others' feedback (I'm NOT an art historian, so I don't intend to make any definitive claims):
- I understand that there is some debate about whether or not Canaletto used a camera obscura to make his paintings. I think that he did use a camera obscura for this painting (and probably others as well).
- I think he painted most of this painting over the course of a single day.
- I think Canaletto was left-handed.
The painting is brilliant. It is incredibly accurate, which suggests a camera obscura. I understand that there's some question about whether or not the aperture of a camera obscura would allow for accurate focus. This is a Venetian painting by a Venetian painter. I think it's likely that the Venetian glass industry would have been capable of producing high-quality optical lenses at that time - if you lived in Europe in the 1700s and you wanted eyeglasses, a telescope, or a nautical spyglass, where would you go to get the highest quality? Probably Venice, if you could afford to travel.
I understand that Canaletto trained under his father to be a theatrical set painter. So he would have developed his skills with speed in mind. Any trick he could come up with to produce a painting faster would have been desirable for him. Combined with the likely availability of high-quality optical lenses, a camera obscura would be a tremendous, and logical, aid in speeding up his process.
Notice the change in sunlight on the architecture. At the left side of the canvas, shadows fall to the right. The sun is low, behind us and to the left, placing it in the west. So this part of the canvas was painted in the evening. But then, look at the right side of the canvas. The shadows fall to the left, at a steep angle, placing the sun high up and to the right, and so probably painted in late morning.
If the image had taken multiple days to complete, it would have made sense for Canaletto to pick a single position for the sun. The fact that he didn't (pick a consistent position for the sun) suggests that he wasn't thinking about his light source at all, which in turn suggests that he was working quickly. You can actually track the movement of the sun by the shift in direction and angle of the shadows across the canvas, from right to left.
With the boats, this is less consistent than in the architecture, but he could have added some of the boats after he painted the architecture.
His treatment of the surface of the water also suggests working quickly. A photo reproduction doesn't show this as well as looking at the painting in person, but here it is: why would a painter be so exacting and accurate in his depictions of architecture and boats, only to paint the surface of the water with simple little U-curves? Looking at it at the MFA, one can see this contrast between his attention to detail and then the lack of it. That contrast in turn is highlighted by comparisons with other nautical works, especially in the MFA's Dutch collections. Most nautical painters who really know their ships also take great care in their depictions of water, but Canaletto doesn't. So again, like with the change in the sun's position, this suggests that Canaletto cared about speed as much as (or more than?) anything else.
Finally, as to Canaletto being left-handed: using oil paint, with a slow drying time, he wouldn't want to smudge his work. The inside of a camera obscura must be dark, except for where the image is projected (obviously). Based on the change in the sun's position, he had to have painted right-to-left. If he were right-handed, he would have created a high probability of messing up his own work. But if he were left-handed, the risk of smudging would be minimized.
I also think he painted the entire background in the light blue sky color some time beforehand, and started painting in the late morning to avoid the architecture being backlit, but I'm not as confident about that.
Again, I would be interested in the opinions of anyone who is more knowledgable about Canaletto than I am...so please feel free to make a comment.
No comments:
Post a Comment