Vermeer and His Use of the Camera Obscura

Uncovering the Truth Behind Jan Vermeer’s Masterpieces

Sep 9, 2009 Jo Murphy

Steadman discusses speculation and controversy surrounding claims that the great seventeenth-century Dutch artist, Johannes Vermeer, used the camera obscura.

The book Vermeer’s Camera combines detailed research with contemporary illustrations, which offer a fascinating glimpse into a time of great scientific and cultural innovation and achievement in Europe.

Today many artists use projectors to trace various parts of their paintings. This use of technology is often debated as a form of cheating. This controversy has been going on for over 100 years. Inside the cover of the book Vermeer's Camera, Steadman discusses the claims "that the great seventeenth-century Dutch artist, Johannes Vermeer, used the camera obscura to create some of the most famous images in Western art."

Vermeer's Biography

Dutch painter, Johannes Vermeer was born 1632 and lived until 1675. He lived in the small Dutch market town of Delft and was much admired by his fellow painters, and became headman of the Guild of Saint Luke, at the age of just 29. Despite extensive research however, there are no documents to show who Vermeer might have studied under or who might have been his pupils. There are no acclaimed drawings of his remaining. The only sources of information about his methods and technique are the paintings themselves.

Camera Obscura

The camera obscura is a simple optical device incorporating a pinhole or lens, with which an image of a scene can be projected onto a screen. This device was the predecessor of the photographic camera. It is suggested by Steadman, that Vermeer would have traced and copied his images using this device.

The Importance of the Debate

Many students today debate whether to use the tracing techniques available to them. They ask whether the use of mechanical drawing devices is wise, or whether their use will decrease drawing ability. Many wonder whether this accepted genius used these kinds of techniques to create his visions, and whether his style was influenced by the techniques if he did.

The book, Vermeer’s Camera is set out like an intellectual detective story. Steadman begins the process of establishing this suggested possibility by exploring Vermeer's possible knowledge of the seventeenth-century optical science. By outlining the history of the early type of photographic camera, Steadman established that he could have indeed used this device. He proved that it was at least possible that the artist could have projected accurate images to trace.

However, it is Steadman's meticulous reconstruction of the artist's studio, complete with a camera obscura, which provides evidence to support the view that Vermeer did indeed use the camera.

Findings that indicate the possibility of tracing do not challenge Vermeer's genius, Steadman claims. What it does show, is that like contemporary artists, Vermeer would have been able experiment with new technology. Technology of this kind avails the artist with tools, which facilitate the development of personal style, broadening the range of techniques and subject matter.

Steadman describes how it is possible to reconstruct the geometry of the room where dozens of Vermeer’s paintings were created. Steadman demonstrates by careful analysis of the reconstructions how Vermeer would have set up a camera obscura. Famous works such as The Music Lesson have been placed side by side for comparison and analysis.

Steadman’s Defence of His Arguments

Steadman claims that it is the “very curious geometrical property of Vermeer's perspectives, considered collectively,” that leads him to believe “it is a consequence of him using a camera obscura in the form of a booth or cubicle.” He says that despite much thought, he has been unable to come up with any plausible alternative explanation. This explanation serves as the most simple and direct, although he reviews many other forms of evidence.

The Influence of Optical Device on Vermeer’s Subject Matter and Style

Steadman argues that Vermeer’s artistic style was bound up within his special vision and his preoccupations with the effects of light.

Vermeer, Steadman points out, manages to achieve uncannily ‘photographic’ effects. Yet, he paints in a way that is often locally imprecise. Sometimes focus is lost and areas of colour may be simplified and flattened, or texture removed.

Vermeer seems to have used the camera obscura as a ‘composition machine.’ This technique facilitated for him perfect perspectival illusion of depth. There was an effect of surface flatness that suggested mosaic or marquetry. Steadman would even like to argue that qualities such as stillness, reticence, hesitancy and psychological ambiguity seem to be qualities brought to Vermeer’s pictures in least in part by his use of the camera obscura.

Resources:

• Steadman. P. Vermeer's Camera: Uncovering the Truth Behind the Masterpieces. Oxford University Press, USA. 2001

The copyright of the article Vermeer and His Use of the Camera Obscura in Multimedia Arts is owned by Jo Murphy. Permission to republish Vermeer and His Use of the Camera Obscura in print or online must be granted by the author in writing.

Camera Obscura

What do you think about this article?

---

NOTE: Because you are not a Suite101 member, your comment will be moderated before it is viewable.

post your comment

What is 6+8?

Comments

Sep 16, 2009 5:15 AM

Guest :

there is not much discussion about Vermeer's use of a camera obscura. It's use is also discussed in depth on the pages of Secret Knowledge by David Hockney, who also made a tv series on the subject in which he re enacts working with the camera obscura and camera lucida. Vermeer was part of the Lucas Guild, which was also a center of technology research and knowledge exchange for artists, architects, scientists, and craftsmen like Christian Huygens and Anthonie van Leeuwenhoek, who pioneered lenses for telescopes and microscopes. Vermeer also depicted an astronomer and a geographer on his works. At the rebuilt guild hall, now Vermeer Center you can, apart from seeing all his known works in chronology and at actual sizes (even the missing one, stolen in Boston, 2 decades ago), watch the market square of Delft through a Camera Obsura

Sep 16, 2009 5:32 PM

Jo Murphy :

Hello,

Thanks for the comments!
I will read around the information you have entered here. Sounds like there is good material for some more articles.

Thanks for reading,
Jo

Dec 22, 2009 12:56 AM

Guest :

Thanks for the thoughtful summary of the debate. I've been hearing about this stuff for a while now, but have just lately developed a serious interest. I believe one thing that is at issue here is the possibility that budding artists will find a justification in Steadman's claims for forgoing the study of drawing.
By the way, I recently did my own perspective study of "The Music Lesson." The perspective in this painting is a simple one-point perspective scheme of a kind which any artist from the Quattrocento onwards would have been capable of developing. No special gadgetry would be necessary; just a knowledge of horizon line, vanishing point, etc. I've ordered Mr. Steadman's book, and I'm eager to learn about his findings.

Jan 6, 2010 10:30 PM

Guest :

I've read Philip Steadman's book, and I must say I enjoyed it a great deal, but at the end of the day, the working process that he proposes for Vermeer doesn't ring true to me. Painting upside-down, in the dark, in a tiny little cubicle? I kept wondering why a painter as accomplished as Vermeer would adopt such an arduous method, when he could simply paint what was in front of him.
As for the much-discussed "camera" look to Vermeer's paintings, his prominent highlights and detail-less shadows, Steadman hits on the simplest explanation, then passes it by, when he mentions "the view through half-closed eyes, as it were." Painters frequently squint their eyes to judge tones and eliminate fussy detail. In my opinion, Vermeer was one of history's great squinters.

4 Comments