stressedpesitter

stressedpesitter t1_je0dyrq wrote

This article is nonsense because the presumption that these artists were interested in painting the world as they saw it, aka, treated their paintings as a recording of the world. We know from writings, letters and actual art historians studying them that this is not the case. None of these painters presume their interest in realism.

Would their art be affected by the observation of light (and therefore be dependent on the atmospheric conditions)? Yes. Were they trying to record or are their paintings useful as a record of environmental pollution? No.

1