UC Forum Explores Controversial Art Theory

Was Jan van Eyck "confessing" when he painted the image of a convex mirror in the Arnolfini Wedding Portrait, and did the secret go undiscovered for 600 years? Charles Falco, representing the science side of a theory that's making waves in international art circles, brought his argument to the University of Cincinnati when he presented "Through the Looking Glass: The Art of the Science of Renaissance Painting."

Falco says he has undisputable evidence that the Masters used concave mirrors and lenses to achieve their greatness. The theory launched a lively debate in front of an audience that numbered in the hundreds.

Falco, a University of Arizona professor of optical sciences, collaborated with world-famous artist David Hockney on the theory and says the partnership has resulted in more than 1,000 pages of scientific research (and still counting) the two have faxed back and forth. It also led to Hockney's new book, Secret Knowledge: Rediscovering the Lost Techniques of the Old Masters. The art and optics theory has been the talk of The New York Times, The Wall Street Journal and The Chronicle of Higher Education, just to name a few prominent publications.

Falco also has a connection to Cincinnati: his 20-year friendship with Richard Newrock, a UC physics professor and interim dean of the College of Applied Science. The two have previously published research together. As Newrock introduced Falco, he said the planning for the lecture drew support from across the university, including the College of Design, Architecture, Art, and Planning (where the lecture was held), College of Applied Science, McMicken College of Arts and Sciences, Office of the Provost, Division of Research and Advanced Studies, and University Libraries.

"David (Hockney) has the eye of a skilled artist," Falco began, "he knows what he's capable of, and it was his own skills that caused him to start questioning what the Masters did."

What the Masters did, historians will tell you, is perfection, and Falco and Hockney say in some paintings, they used concave mirrors and lenses to achieve it. Falco promised the audience he would show them how artists would use a lens "like a good artist would, to serve his purposes." He's also emphatic about saying the use of mirrors and lenses should not be considered cheating. He says they were tools, just like the artists' brushes and oils.

Falco showed a video, featuring artist David Hockney using a concave mirror to bounce the outside scenery from a window onto a wall. He encouraged the audience to try it at home. All they'd need is a curved mirror that can be purchased at any department or drugstore.

His presentation showed images of paintings dating back to 1351, evidence that lenses did exist at that time, because the painting depicted a man wearing eyeglasses and using a magnifying glass.

But Falco says simple physics hammers it home the same way a photographer could look at the information in a photo and calculate the size of the lens that was used to take the picture. "It's science. No fudging is possible."

Falco said he was able to duplicate a piece of blurred image found in Lorenzo Lotto's Husband and Wife on his own bedspread, finding two vanishing points in the portrait where he says the artist readjusted the lens. He says there was a three-degree difference for Lotto and a three-degree difference in the photo of his bedspread. "No way does this happen by some kind of visualization."

He says he was able to determine that Robert Campin used a bench and stood while painting, and that Hockney was convinced that Caravaggio used lenses, but the scientific evidence was harder to find. "The places I showed you where lenses were used were places where artists made mistakes. You can also hide that you're using lenses."

He showed "precise copies of different magnification," suggesting van Eyck was able to enlarge from a drawing and create a painting. In the images, he pointed out the "points" where he found his evidence. He closed his lecture by emphasizing the findings did not diminish the greatness of the Masters. "These artists were geniuses who produced paintings by extraordinary dexterity and visual perception, but also used lenses."

Falco then opened the discussion for questioning by a panel of UC art historians and scientists: Kristi Nelson, art historian and vice provost; Howard Jackson, physics professor and vice president for Research and Advanced Studies; Jim Murray, professor of history; Jonathan Riess, professor of art history and director, School of Art; John Stewart, professor of fine arts; and Maureen France, photographer and associate professor, School of Design.

"Yes, lenses were available, but optics were not secret or forbidden knowledge," said Jim Murray, who disputed the theory. Falco said the use of lenses became popular as the artists passed the information back and forth, but Murray questioned the job networking aspect. "This was the 15th century. There were no large workshops for these artists." He also said the artists were not intellectuals of an academic sort, but had achieved their perfection in art and technique. Plus, Murray said there is no historical documentation showing artists used lenses and mirrors. "From a historical standpoint, it's possible, but there's not a shred of documentary evidence from the historical perspective, and the burden of proof is made skeptical on this."

UC art historian Kristi Nelson also remarked on the guild system and the training of the Masters. "They had apprenticeships that lasted two to six years and they came out with good skills in drawing, but they only progressed through their apprenticeship by mastering those skills in drawing.

"I believe the artists were superb in drawing. I'm not sure if they needed lenses to make these distortions. I can't discount the fact that convex mirrors appear (in some paintings), but what's reflected in the mirror is a distortion," Nelson said.

Photographer Maureen France believed the theory had some weight. "From an optical perspective, it's very convincing. But also, with all the devices in the world, no one could just paint like that. It's a tool."

Jonathan Reiss, an expert on 15th century Italian art, suggested there were "serious questions of artists writing the history of art. It's seriously flawed in one way, in that it's very self-serving. It's a view of the history and art that underlies his (Hockney's) approach to art." Reiss added he also had concerns about "vastly oversimplifying" the technique of the Masters.

The lecture also opened to questions from the audience, and afterwards, there was a reception and book exhibition of the great painters. Preceding the lecture, the audience lined up for a peek at a demonstration of the theory. A box housed the demonstration that had a mirror and lens. The display was coordinated by the UC Physics Department. The book exhibition was a presentation of University Libraries.