So I suppose that Vermeer painted by obersving the really existing rooms and objects, and applied roughly Perspectives as the need arises to make feel the reasonable space, and referenced Camera Obscura, may or may not. I think it is practical explanation.

ust a few comment about engravers.

I love Durer and Schongauer.
Unfortunately, I don't know any spiritual engraver after Schongauer, Durer and Lucas van Leyden except Jan Harmensz. Muller ( but he is a man of technique )
And I want to mention about Raimondi.
I had been thinking him as unskilled engraver and an artisan for long time. But I could see his engravings at Exhibition Pussin and Raphael Aichi Prefectural Museum of Art 1999. That had changed my estimation about him.

I find nothing but faults as far as I see his engraving on book, like as the many original prints of engraving are usally deprived of the original smooth and brilliant impression of lines by reproduction.

His originals gave me the impressions, the natural and clear modeling of human body as the characteristics of italian art. I thought he is artist, and I was comfirmed by comparing with another engravers, he was never an artisan, he has the definite his style.

It was first time to see the engraving of Schongauer on the exhibition SPACE IN EUROPEAN ART Tokyo 1987. And I could see largely his work at Museum of Unterlinden Colmar France. I had been there to see the famous Isenheimer Altarpiece The Crucifixion by Grunewald in 1991. I happened to find Colmar is Schongauer's town. -Aug. 22, 2001 M.S-

May 25, 2003, corrected and re-lay-outed

Kobayashi suppoeses that the space of Vermeer's paintings are artificial by imagination and Perspective.

I don't think so, I think Vermeer like painter depicting the materiality needs or loves observation and the materiality can be never reproduced by imagination, an imagination offers only very rough and simple image same as the human figure by computer graphic, very poor articial quality.

And it is much easier to paint by observing real objects than by reconstructing by imagination and Perspective.

Do you know any artist who had been able to construct the artifical complex space, landscape or row of buildings along a street by imagination?

Uccelo loved Perspective, but, Do you think Uccelo's paintings as the good examples of Perspective?

How's about the Adoration of Magi by da Vinci? He proud his perspective and left the study of the Adoration of Magi, and it showes simple background by 1-point perspective, there are constructings, stairs, walls, colums just arranged in right angle, but real and historical city is never like that in right angle, more complex, so you can't apply and understand the real view by one perspective, or one vanishing point.

By my experience, I know I can apply partly the perspective.
For example,
if you find the vanishing point about one building by its two side, you can draw its details by the perspective about that vanishing point. Of couse, you might draw by one perspective just for simple compositon.

that after Impressionism, painters except realist had thrown away the concept of Space reconstracted by Perspective on the Plain, so,

Why can they imagine "Cubic" in no "Space"?

The Clever word "Cubism" of critics helps nothing, Is there anyone who supposes the quality of Cubic about Les Demoiselles d'Auvignon by Picasso?
Painters were just fascinated by the materiality of the oil painting material like a clay,or colors, or forms, or improvisation.

Plains still remain on a plain, even gathered by different view point, because there isn't logic connecting and relating each plain.

And the detail like the cracks of the wall and its tangible materiality might be never reproduced by the Camera Obscura's screen, but by eyes.

I say again the Camera Obscura might never be a easy way same as to use photo, not changing, only to push the camera bottun.

There isn't hateful distortion like a camera view and quite natural image on the View of Delft. And about The Allegory of Painting, the table's plain and floor plain give the impression of uncorrectness, i.e. table's plain slopes down to this side for floor plain.

Vermeer probably knew Canera Obscura and used it for reference. And he might never use the strict perspective and use it for only Painter Use, I mean the true strict perspective is too difficult to handle for a painter except mordern computer, even though it needs trerrible Imput-working for complex image, so it is resonable way to use Rough Perspective or Painter Perspective rather to trouble with it for long time. Painter needs not Correctness but Resemblance for the reasonable understanding of space.

On the contrary her opinion, I think there existed the Pentagon-shape table, not Tetragon and he didn't use such new concept-Reversed-Perspective, this must be the concept categorized to mordern art, and I can see or feel? vaguely the another two side of pentagon, one, below the left hand, in the space surrounded with the blue apron, the dark red color skirt, pottery poured with milk and bread, and another one in the space colored by Olive green same as table cloth surrounded by the apron and breads.

Do I misunderstand it?

I saw the original in Rijksmuseum, Amsterdam, but had never the impression of such unnatural or artificial Reversed Perspective about table, and I think most of people too. She loves her idea too much, so misundertand.

I can point out another example like such misunderstand, that is "Cubism", I can say it "Plainism" on the contrary of critics. I here say simply the reason,

Sixthly
To try it really by Camera Obscura, so they will be soon understood. I can't understand why they are only discussing their hypotheis not to try further experiments.
So I am convinced of not using Camera Obscura.
These discussion is the bussiness for those who haven't experience about that skill like art critics or poor skilled artists or know nothing to device.

Lastly
I can say it about Vermeer. For good skilled Artist like Vermeer need not to use such a Camera Obscura.

bout Vermeer and Camera Obscura

It is more definite about Vermaeer, for his subject is mainly the interer space of a room, very simple comparing with landscape.

First
The characteristcs of his paintings are rather the depicting of the materiality than his perspective or the correctness of the shape.
And Vermeer paintings sometime gives me the impression of uncorrectness.

For examples, the floor position of the Milkmaid is too high.

By the way, Yoriko Kobayashi metioned her hyposesis, she writes on her writing "The World of Vermeer" and I heard once it about TV programe NICHIYO BIJYUTSUKAN NHK that Vermeer might intentionaly neglect to apply the strict perspective to the table of the Milkmaid for the purpose of Composition to settle the still-life motives, breads, potteries.
She conculded, she think rather he use Reversed-Perspective like arragement than there existed really the trapzoid shape table with shorter side in near."

Camera Obscura might helps practically nothing for the specialist, except just for a reference.

Really there didn't remain any record or technical book about the using of Camera Obscura means that it hadn't practical use. It's quite different from using photogaraph by photo-realism artist and this is easy way.

Thirdly
It is easy to draw the building that was designed by human has simple ratio about it detail, I mean, for example, the layout of the windows or ornaments or bricks pattern has simple arragement by particular ratio in simple number. So you determined the whole size of the building, then you do only devide and disposed the windows as in same interval. If it is the side plain converging in depth, you can use the same method of the perspective triangle for the side plain to devide same interval along the depth direction. Though it is a little troublesome but easy.

Forthly
The genre of Landscape as Art was established rather later. I have read about the article mentioned that the landscape paitings of CANALETTO was thought rather as a souvenir, if I didn't misunderstand it, than the Art like a Rubens. So the technique of CANALETTO or his talent as the speciallist of drawing didn't properly esteem. i.e. To draw precisely the details as its existing, mere landscape has never been thought as Art and never praised. So was there anyone to do so, besides exceptions?

Fifthly
I can draw much precisely and accurately, not using photogaraph than CANALETTO.
For, I am using the dessin scale improved and invented by myself, though it is quite primitive instrument.

y this opportunity, I mention my opinion about the Camera Obscura and CANALETTO.

Generally speaking, as I know, it is said that CANALETTO used Camera Obscura for his landscapes. But I do never think so. This is the guess for ART CRITIC who can't draw precisly, but clumsy like childish one.

If you used to and could draw the precise drawing, you think he could do it without Camera Obscura.

First
There remain CANALETTO's drawing, and these give quite different impression from Camera eye.

Secondly
it seemes tedious some and tiresome working to only trace the image on the screen of Camera Obscura or in dark room of Camera Obscura. And if you were a specialist of drawing, you wanted to draw the decisive and final line that has certain quality not monatonous lines, seeing the texture of serface of the paper and confirming the impression of the details and whole.

And portable-Camera Obscura may have only small screen and it gives only small and rough layout, or by big Camera Obscura, it is difficult to draw in the dark room, like drawing in eyemasked, even he had a big screen for use of depicting detail, and by that tedious efforts, it gives only a dull traced drawing, but there remain beautiful and spritual and lighteous drawings of CANALETTO.

Shortly say it, it is quick and easy to draw by hands and eyes than to trace the image of Camera Obscura.

The average engraving speed is about 3 square cm/hour for No. 1005, only 1square cm/ hour for No. 1007. So I proceed to transfer the part of draft, then engrave and when I finished the part, then transfer the next part.

First, I transfer the draft on the sectioned-tracing paper, then put the paper on the copper plate adjasting by base point and line considering the paper expasion by temparature, then marking the outline on the plate by needle. This is quite same process of Fresco, GIORNATA.

I decide to use needle for transferring, for I remember, I don't remember the name and the date, the TV programe, NICHIYO BIJYUTSUKAN-Sunday Museum-NHK that one of Artist mentioned and pointed out the marks of needle about Durer's Nemeisis. I don't know whether this methord is quite common for engraver or not, for I never be taught by engraver.

By one of manual book, the engraver use carbon paper and tracing the line on copper plate by needle not vanishing by handling, I think the trasfered line by conbon paper itself has enough width for burin, so you need to decide which side of line to engrave. Needle-pointing is accurater than the carbon-traced line and never vanishing and even if the pointings would remain on the plate, you will never notice its existence without close examination.

Especically, the transfererring by needle marking is effective and useful for engraving small letter about 3mm hight. You can precisely trasfer the shape of letter, but never do it by the carbon transferring. So I like it. You can engrave finely for every detail as its shape, if you will be able to transfer the shape and to see and understand the shape.

Why I don't do so, for, burin can engrave many things only for one square cm. And it's same work as engraving for same density whether to engrave rough pattern or to do the materiality of the details. So I choiced depicting the materiality. And it's fan.

I might have well engraved the detail much more precisely, if I could engrave in the field. But it's impossible. And I don't know how many hours I need to finish.

To finsih the sky is fan as well as by watercolor. I can here be freely engraving, for need not make sure like the detail of buildings or houses, because the clouds itself are not correct shape as quickly changing, not remaining still, though we feel its moving very slow when we see its aimlessly, and more correct shape I want to get, more quickly changing the shape the clouds I feel. So it's only free time for engraving.

But the sky is important, because it determines the whole impression of brightness. Generally, darken the sky, then it enlighten the highlight parts of the ground.

I here engraved the clouds like Durer. I mean the using contuor line and blank space, but shadowing is different. I love the clouds of The Sea Monster, simple, definite and dertermined, well depicting a towering mass of clouds. The blue sky was engraved by the discontinuing lines influenced by CANALETTO.

he method of trasferring

I had tried another way of easy trasfering for the first work No. 1004, for it is troublesome working to transfer the draft. Especially for I have depicted much the details. More details I draw, more labour I need, to draw same image twice is quite terrible. There is no enjoyment about that but just mere labour!
You might agree about that, if you had experienced with it. But it was terriblly failure. And I found it that I could engrave only small arear on daily working.

So I can engrave easily even the zig-zag line by the gripe, I might name it SUGITA-gripe. I will mention precisely about this on the page of TOOL.

I had been improving the gripe from first work 1004 and it had been finished the fundamental design until I started the second work 1005. I had been able to handling burin easily and freely with my gripe.

So I tried on this work more freer line like CNALETTO's etching line for engraving, though I don't think it succesful. you can see these expression on the datails.
Still, the whole impresion of the clouds was influenced by Durer's.

I had been engraving from the distant view at right hand to the near view at left and then sky at final. I used the expression like CANALETTO for the building on distant.

But I find soon that the expression isn't suitable for engraving well depicting the details, then I stoped it except sky, still I think the expression is effective for rough images like etchings.

So I began to engrave like explaining the details, the roof has tiles, and that has carved shape so the shadow is like this, and also has drane, the house's wall is made of planks of wood, and its have anual rings, bank, bank is covered by grasses and its shape is,.. like that.

Of couse those details were never precisely as its were existing, but its were their concept image that I have.

But every time at sketching in the field I had seen objects one by one ascertaining by my binocular to recognize what it was.

Why I did so?

About Ganpi print
Ganpi is one of the traditional Japanese papers, slightly luster, very thin as see-through but strong. I use the paper, slightly yellowish, manufactured by machine. Ganpi 's yellow and its luster suites well with Charbonnel Black 55981, it is quite different from Eouropian paper, I think and I love.

The technique of Ganpi print is common. So I don't mention it here. But it needs experience about its moisture of Ganpi and the dilution rate of adhesive bond with water.

bout the expression

I owed here the expression of CANALETTO's etchings, for example La Torre di Marghera, for depicting the sky.

Of course I didn't copy his style at all, but that essence.

I mean, he used the line, discontiued one that gives the rhythmical and lightious impression to the atomsphere and he has the strong and systematic style as the professional of drawing.
By the usual expression by burin, it is expressed by smooth and straight parallel lines at regular interval, clouds are depicted by changing the width of line to narrow.

I think these expression is resonable for burin, because the burin cutting forward copper plate isn't suitable to change quickly its direction like pencil or etching needle needs little force just as sliding on the surface of the material.

But I had deviced and invented by myself the new grip-shape of burin, because the traditional mushroom grip and bar-type holder is difficult to handling and gives stress to the hand for long working. My gripe is natural gripe and easy to sharpen the tool and handling, for example, quickly change the direction as you want, I think.

2. black print:
wiped off only by tarlartan, without hand-wipping, so there still remains thin layer of ink around the edge of engraved line, because the section of engraved line is triangle-shape, so the ink in the line is dragged out by wipping-cloth much more easier than etching's line having square-shape section with flat bottom.
I happened to find its effect, that gives some nuance and soften image to the thick contour, rather HARD impression. This effect couldn't be reproduce except by GANPI print with adhesive bond, acetate.

Honestly, this type of print is suitable only for earlier works, 1005,1006, still inexperieced engraving. It was UNEXPECTED EFFECT.
I was impressed by the two prints about its "BLACKNESS", one was mezzotint by maybe, Yamaguchi, other was wood engraving by Kobayashi. I saw these at Miyako gallery SHINSAIBASH on Aug. or Sept., 1994. So I wanted to press my prints much more blacker and tried many ink and press-condition. The black print is that result.

3. medium print:
the combination of above mentioned two wippings, i.e. the wipping of normal print is used for the part of distant view, and the wipping of black print is used for the part of middle and near view. So the combination emphasize the perspective effect.

4. gradation print:
This is variation of the medium print with color ink, i.e. Ocean blue and Snow white TI, gives the impression of the much more emphasized effect of perspective than medium print.

I can say it as the one of airial perspective.
wipped off by the medium print methord and then apply the whity blue ink( mixed ratio: Ocean blue: Snow white TI=1:5, the mixted inks are diluted with turpentin for easy wipe) to the part of distant view, then wipping with the normal print methord

his engraving is the second work of the Landscape in OSAKA.
I had established the fundamental process of engraving by the struggled with the first work, namely, the methord of transferring draft to copper plate and process of daily working.
That expression wasn't still settled, the contour lines were expressed by one line and were rather thick. Yet this work might give the systematic whole impression, I think.

The characteristics of this work are these.

First
I tried to depicting the detail, its materiality, i.e. tiled roof, wooden boads, glass window, concrete, grass and clouds. You can see its on the details.

Secondly
The contour of objects were engraved by continuing one line, so that might give rather the HARD impression.

Thirdly
The road along the river bank right hand of the image was left as blank. Namely, I used the expression of blank like a Durer's prints.

Forthly
I pressed this plate for 4 styles of prints. Namely, I used different wippings. These wippings have reproducibility and steadiness, so I can reproduce it again at will.

the four styles of prints are below

1. normal print:
cleanly wiped off the ink on the copper plate surface.