Master of the Joseph Sequence (ca. 1500)
.
Lucas van Leyden (1512)
.
Pieter Coecke van Aelst (ca. 1540)
.
Hans Sebald Beham (1544)
.
Master of the School of Fontainebleau (1556)
.
Jacopo Tintoretto (1559)
.
Cornelis Cort after Titian (ca. 1560)
.
.jpg)
Philips Galle after Maarten van Heemskerck (ca. 1570)
.
(Follower of) Jacob de Backer (late 16th C.)
.
Battistello Caraccioli (around 1600)
.
Giovanni Lanfranco (undated)
.
Paolo Finoglia (formerly attributed to Artemisia Gentileschi, 1622)
.
Orazio Gentileschi (1626)
.
Christiaen van Couwenbergh (1626)
.
Alessandro Turchi (undated)
.
Guido Reni (ca. 1630)
.
Cornelis Bloemaert after Jacques Blanchard (1633)
.
Pietro Liberi (2nd quarter 17th C.)
.
Rembrandt van Rijn (1634)
.
Carlo Francesco Nuvolone (ca. 1640)
.
Bartolomeo Gennari (mid 17th C.)
.
Italian School (mid 17th C.)
.
Bartolomé Esteban Murillo (1648)
.
Guercino (1649)
.
Johannes Spilberg (mid 17th C.)
.
Rembrandt van Rijn (1655)
.
Antonio del Castillo (ca. 1660)
.
Ciro Ferri (ca. 1675)
.
Carlo Cignani (1680)
.
Francesco Solimena (ca. 1690)
.
Willem van Mieris (1691)
.
Nicolas Bertin (1699)
.
Lazzaro Baldi (attributed, 1703)
.
Jean-Baptiste Nattier (1711)
.
Johann Georg Platzer (mid 18th C.)
.
Filippo Falciatore (mid 18th C.)
.
William Blake (1805)
.
Domenico Morelli (ca. 1850)
.
Antonio Maria Esquivel (1854)
.
_Joseph_et_la_femme_de_Putiphar_-_Jean-Baptiste_Cariven.jpg)
Jean-Baptiste Cariven (1883)
.
Lovis Corinth (1914)
.
Alexander Rothaug (early 20th C.)
.
Marc Chagall (1931)
.
'She accused Joseph of attempting to rape her after she failed to seduce him'
.
The other way around, as usual:
ReplyDeletethe story is handed down by men, all paintings are greated by male artists, horny, eager to accuse women for their own lust. As usual, as usual
The other way around but not as usual. In fact, the bible is full of stories about virtuous women and lusty men
Deletegreated = created
ReplyDeleteHey, what is going on here? The Nattier painting is the Baldi painting traced, flopped, and repainted. Go ahead...try it in Photoshop. There's virtually a 1:1 correlation not only between the figures, but also the beds, the drapery, the backgrounds. Did Nattier use one of those Magic Artist gadgets they used to sell in comic books?
ReplyDeleteI'm glad you noticed and you're right, it must be mirror images, different colours. I've also read your blog about it. Time for some research.
DeleteBoth images are in commons.wikimedia. The Nattier painting is said to be 74 x 92 cm and belongs to the Hermitage. The other painting (61 x 74 cm) has been attributed to Lazzaro Baldi, but a location is not given, only a source: http://www.dorotheum.com/. No further information can be found here. This makes it rather suspect.
And what about the differences in the pattern of the tilings? The mystery remains...
As I wrote in Smurfswacker's blog, painters from the 17th century onwards, began using what is known as a dark camera or camera obscura (look it up in wikipedia). You could get an image projected directly over your canvas through a contraption of lenses, though the image would be reversed or flipped over, and upside down. The proof of this contraption existing comes for how realistic paintings suddenly became from the mid-sixteenth century onwards (especially with those Dutch masters Van Eyck, Vermeer, etc; also look at Murillo's painting here and see how he "perfectly" captured the pattern on the carpet and the bed covers; think you can do that by simply staring at it?). Many art critics/historians doubt this theory, mainly because they aren't artists themselves, but the paintings Smurfswacker pointed out are a perfect example that a camera obscura was put into use. For further proof of a dark camera being used, look up Van Eyck's Arnolfini painting. He even painted his own reflexion on a concave mirror at the back of the room. As any artist can attest, you can't see such small details by simply looking at your models in front of you.
DeleteThanks a lot for this plausible explanation
Delete