^this. Cameras distract us from the point of a painting, which is that an idea has been made into a physical thing. A painting is not just an image, it is an object, with the trace of a person's hand. digital animations and photos just can never compete with the remarkable fact of lumps of paint turning into an image, and back again, infront of you.
If they got the point of Carravagio, why would they feel the need to change or add to it? Why not make an animation with their own images?
I take the point that my analogy was crap, though.
^this. Cameras distract us from the point of a painting, which is that an idea has been made into a physical thing. A painting is not just an image, it is an object, with the trace of a person's hand. digital animations and photos just can never compete with the remarkable fact of lumps of paint turning into an image, and back again, infront of you.
If they got the point of Carravagio, why would they feel the need to change or add to it? Why not make an animation with their own images?
I take the point that my analogy was crap, though.