Help


[permalink] [id link]
+
Page "Aelbert Cuyp" ¶ 7
from Wikipedia
Edit
Promote Demote Fragment Fix

Some Related Sentences

Cuyp and from
In general it may be said that Cuyp learned tone from the exceptionally prolific van Goyen, light from Both and form from his father.
In addition to the scarcely documented and confirmed biography of Cuyp ’ s life, and even more so than his amalgamated style from his three main influences, there are yet other factors that have led to the misattribution and confusion over Aelbert Cuyp ’ s works for hundreds of years.
His highly influenced style which incorporated Italianate lighting from Jan Both, broken brush technique and atonality from Jan van Goyen, and his ever-developing style from his father Jacob Gerritsz Cuyp was studied acutely by his most prominent follower, Abraham van Calraet.
The dining room, now decorated with what appear to be Dutch tiles but is in fact trompe l ' oeil, contains a collection of small, mainly Dutch, paintings from the 16th and 17th centuries by such artists as Aelbert Cuyp, Adrian van Ostade and Jan Steen.
Van Der Neer got assistance from him ; Cuyp expected none from Van Der Neer.

Cuyp and van
Cuyp ’ s “ van Goyen phase ” can be placed approximately in the early 1640s.
Cuyp probably first encountered a painting by van Goyen in 1640 when van Goyen was, as Stephen Reiss points out “ at the height of powers .” This is noticeable in the comparison between two of Cuyp ’ s landscape paintings inscribed 1639 where no properly formed style is apparent and the landscape backgrounds he painted two years later for two of his father ’ s group portraits that are distinctly van Goyenesque.
In Cuyp ’ s River Scene, Two Men Conversing ( 1641 ) both of these van Goyen-influenced stylistic elements are noticeable
Lastly and most importantly, the precision in mimicking Cuyp ’ s style by his follower Abraham van Calraet and their contentious signatures makes it all the more difficult to determine which paintings are genuinely that of Cuyp and which ones are actually accurate reproductions in his style.
It is this reluctance which was felt by the Rijksmuseum to reattribute works to other painters ( Abraham van Calraet does not even appear in a Museum catalogue until 1926, and even then he is not given his own entry ) which shows how important it is to art historians that painters are accurately connected to their works — and this is continuously necessary for those of Aelbert Cuyp, as Dordrecht ’ s most famous painter may not in fact be Dordrecht ’ s most famous painter.
Jacob van Ruisdael, Aelbert Cuyp, Hendrick Avercamp, Ludolf Backhuysen, Meindert Hobbema, Aert van der Neer.
Adriaen and Isaac van Ostade, David Teniers, Aelbert Cuyp, Johannes Vermeer and Pieter De Hooch were among the many painters specializing in genre subjects in the Netherlands during the 17th century.
It consists of 84 paintings and includes some outstanding works by artists including Hendrick Avercamp, Gerard Ter Borch, Pieter Claesz, Aelbert Cuyp, Frans Hals, Pieter de Hooch, Jacob van Ruisdael, Jan Steen, David Teniers the Younger and Willem van de Velde.
The RKD also lists Jan van Bijlert, the two Boths, the two Honthorsts, Leonaert Bramer, Bartholomeus Breenbergh, Hendrick ter Brugghen, Jacob Gerritsz Cuyp, Willem van Drielenburg, Wybrand de Geest, Nicolaus Knüpfer, Cornelis van Poelenburch, Henrik Schook, Matthias Stom, Herman van Swanevelt, Dirck Voorst, and Jan Weenix.

Cuyp and light
Cuyp ( 1594 – 1651 / 52 ), he is especially known for his large views of the Dutch countryside in early morning or late afternoon light.
There are landscapes in the collections of the dukes of Bedford and Westminster, in which Cuyp has represented either the frozen Maes with fishermen packing herrings, or the moon reflecting its light on the river's placid waters.
In the National Gallery, London picture Cuyp signs his name on the pail of a milkmaid, whose figure and red skirt he has painted with light effectiveness near the edge of Van Der Neer's landscape.

Cuyp and are
The development of Aelbert Cuyp, who was trained as a landscape painter, may be roughly sketched in three phases based on the painters who most influenced him during that time and the subsequent artistic characteristics that are apparent in his paintings.
Common among the mislabeled works are all of the reasons identified for misattributing Cuyp ’ s works: the lack of biography and chronology of his works made it difficult to discern when paintings were created ( making it difficult to pinpoint an artist ); contentious signatures added to historians ’ confusion as to who actually painted the works ; and the collaborations and influences by different painters makes it hard to justify that a painting is genuinely that of Aelbert Cuyp ; and finally, accurate identification is made extremely difficult by the fact that this same style was copied ( rather accurately ) by his predecessor.
The same feeling and similar subjects are found in Cuyp and Van Der Neer, before and after their partnership, but Cuyp was the leading genius.
We are near Dordrecht in the landscape sunset of the Louvre, in which Cuyp evidently painted the foreground and cows.
They are less valuable in the market than those of Cuyp or Hobbema ; but, possessing a charm peculiarly their own, they are much sought after by collectors.

Cuyp and so
Cuyp signed many of his works but rarely dated them, so that a chronology of his career has not been satisfactorily reassembled.
Cuyp ” insignia, many paintings were left unsigned ( not to mention undated ) after being painted, and so a similar signature was added later on, presumably by collectors who inherited / discovered the works.
Cuyp ’ s pupils and assistants often worked on paintings in his studio, and so most of the work of a painting could be done without Cuyp ever touching the canvas, but merely approving its finality.

Cuyp and technique
Furthermore, his evolving technique and collaborations with his father add to the puzzle over which works should be attributed to Cuyp.
A very early picture, dated 1628, in the gallery of Gotha, bears the signature of Johannes in full and shows de Heem familiar with the technique of the young Aelbert Cuyp.

Cuyp and also
Aelbert Cuyp was born in Dordrecht on October 20, 1620, and also died there on November 15, 1691.
The Wallace Collection also displays many other treasures, such as two paintings by Titian, four Rembrandts, three Rubenses, four Van Dycks, twenty-two Canalettos, nineteen Bouchers, masterpieces by de Hooch, nine Teniers, Frans Hals, nine Murillos, two Velázquez and paintings by Domenichino, Cima, Daddi, Reni, Rosa, Thomas Gainsborough, Joshua Reynolds, Antoine Watteau, Nicholas Lancret, Jan Steen, Aelbert Cuyp and nine Guardis.
With the Third Marquess of Hertford and Sir Charles Long acting as his art advisors, George IV also bought Old Master paintings by Rembrandt, Rubens, Van Dyck, Cuyp and Jan Steen.

Cuyp and very
Even Arnold Houbraken, a noted historian of Dutch Golden Age paintings and the sole authority on Cuyp for the hundred years following his death, paints a very thin biographical picture.

Cuyp and same
It is around this same time that Cuyp ’ s style changed fundamentally.
Calraet mimicked Cuyp ’ s style, incorporating the same aspects, and produced similar landscapes to that of the latter.

Cuyp and work
While it is assumed that the younger Cuyp did work with his father initially to develop rudimentary talents, Aelbert became more focused on landscape paintings while Jacob was a portrait painter by profession.
A Cuyp drawing may look like he intended it to be a finished work of art, but it was most likely taken back to the studio and used as a reference for his paintings.

Cuyp and .
Aelbert Jacobsz Cuyp ( October 20, 1620 – November 15, 1691 ) was one of the leading Dutch landscape painters of the Dutch Golden Age in the 17th century.
Jacob Gerritsz Cuyp, his father, was a portraitist.
The amount of biographical information regarding Aelbert Cuyp is tremendously limited.
The year after his marriage Cuyp became the deacon of the reformed church.
Even Houbraken recalled that Cuyp was a devout Calvinist and the fact that when he died, there were no paintings of other artists found in his home.
The next phase in the development of Cuyp ’ s increasingly amalgamated style is due to the influence of Jan Both.
Both, and subsequently Cuyp, used the advantages of this new lighting style to alter the sense of depth and luminosity possible in a painting.
Cuyp was one of the first Dutch painters to appreciate this new leap forward in style and while his own Both-inspired phase was quite short ( limited to the mid 1640s ) he did, more than any other contemporary Dutch artist, maximize the full chromatic scale for sunsets and sunrises.
Cuyp ’ s third stylistic phase ( which occurred throughout his career ) is based on the influence of his father.

0.143 seconds.