Please sign in to post.

Art Live in Person Versus Reproductions and New Finds

We gravitate towards art museums. But I would hardly call us experts and our tastes differ. I love Impressionism --he doesn't. He likes Russian icons and I'm through after the first four. What we share most is changing our minds while looking at an original.

In person, I liked Klimt less and Schiele more; Monet less and Manet more; Michelangelo more and DaVinci less; Rembrant less and Vermeer more; Degas more and Van Gogh (actually more, but less relative to Degas); and so on. Artists I knew little of thrill me, and iconic images like The Mona Lisa let me down. Artists I dismissed as pleasant poster makers like Mucha grab me. He already knew he loved Mucha even if he didn't know the name before.

Does anyone else have this different in the original experience?

Posted by
293 posts

Twice that I remember off the top of my head: as an art-naive 20 year old, I beheld Kandinsky for the first time in the Pinakothek in Munich and was surprised to love it! Second, (fast forward to 35 years old and a little bit more sophisticated) I had scoffed at the Rembrandts in the Louvre and in Belgium until I stood before them again, this time older.

I haven't looked at real art in years, though.... I need to see the collections in Vienna again.

Posted by
11613 posts

Almost everything looks better to me in person. I walked through the Louvre a few times and didn't even stop at the Mona Lisa, but when I finally did I was surprised at the luminosity of the painting.

Michelangelo makes me cry, especially the Saint Matthew at the Accademia.

Then there are the "bonus" experiences, finding a work of art in a museum that Ibdid not realize was there. And the happy surprises that come from finding an unexpected artist, or type of artwork (like the frescoes of the rupestri churches in Matera).

Posted by
6462 posts

I always thought looking at reproductions or the photos in art books was the same as seeing the painting, until in the early 1980s I stood face to face with Leonardo's "Lady with an Ermine" and was blown away. It was, for me, a transformational experience. There is nothing like seeing a work of art - even one we don't like or don't appreciate - in person.

We now haunt art museums and churches, "discovering" wonderful works of art.

Posted by
8293 posts

The first time I saw Monet's Water Lillies in the Orangerie, I was swept away. I remember actually gasping aloud. It was a thrilling moment.

Posted by
11294 posts

Many paintings look different, and usually far better and more impressive, in person than they do in reproductions. The two that I can think of, off the top of my head, that had MUCH greater impact in person were Renoir's Luncheon of the Boating Party (in the Phillips Collection in Washington, DC) and Charles Demuth's I Saw the Figure 5 in Gold (in the Metropolitan Museum of Art in New York). I always liked Renoir, but seeing this one live blew me away. And I never thought much of the Demuth until I saw it in person - it's a whole different painting from the way it looks in reproductions.

I also agree that Renoir, Vermeer, and Van Gogh are diminished in reproductions in general. I didn't care for Van Gogh until I saw some of his better paintings live. The Potato Eaters is one that really doesn't work in a reproduction, but is very powerful live.

My best new finds have been artists whose work doesn't travel outside their home country, so seeing them in a museum was a genuine surprise. Three of the most memorable were the paintings and sculptures in National Museum Soares dos Reis, in Porto (if you like Bernini, you'll like Soares dos Reis); the paintings in the Russia Museum in St. Petersburg (The Wave by Aivazovsky, alone, justifies the trip); and the various works (including Cubist furniture) in the Veletržní palác in Prague.

Posted by
7117 posts

I've always enjoyed viewing art works in books when I was a kid in school, but my love affair with art and my quest to visit as many art museums as possible began when I was 13 or 14 and saw the original of one of my favorites (Rembrandt's Lucretia) in the Minneapolis Institute of Arts. Seeing a favorite work of art up close and personal can be an amazing experience.

One of my most recent experiences in this regard was seeing DaVinci's Lady with an Ermine when I was in Krakow. That was amazing to me. I personally like it much better than the Mona Lisa, which I saw years ago in the Louvre and was disappointed in it. Oddly enough I learned that Lady with an Ermine was on display in Krakow by reading this forum and seeing it in person turned out to be a highlight of my trip.

EDIT Just thought of another one. When I took Psychology 101 in College the cover of the textbook was A Sunday on La Grande Jatte by Georges Seurat. Needless to say the reproduction on a book cover did not do it justice. A couple of years later, on a trip to Chicago we went to the Art Institute of Chicago and there it was in front of me. It's very large (about 7' x 10') and it blew my mind.

Posted by
783 posts

I’ve never been much of an art museum person – I've always preferred history type museums. This all changed when we went to the Orsay in Paris. We walked into one of the Impressionist rooms and right there in front of us was Renoir’s “Moulin de la Galette”. I was dumbstruck. I literally froze, my throat constricted and I got all teary eyed - I was completely captivated. The color and intensity in person was so much more than I had ever imagined when looking at a poster or page in a book.

During that same trip we went to the Marmottan. I didn’t realize that there were other works of art there besides Monets. What a wonderfully unexpected surprise to turn the corner and come face to face with Caillebotte’s “Paris Street ; Rainy Day”, the painting I coveted the most when playing Masterpiece as a kid!

Needless to say – I’m now officially hooked on art museums and seeing all of the amazing masterpieces in person!

Posted by
10509 posts

My first transformative experience was in the 1970s seeing Van Gogh's Almond Blossoms during a special exhibit's evening hours at the deYoung in San Francisco. I was alone in the quiet room with the art works. Forward forty years and a lot of art experience, when I'm in Philadelphia for a conference. Van Gogh was in town too, so I got tickets to a before hours tour. There was the same painting and it hadn't lost its power over me.

Posted by
4042 posts

Having taken one art history course in college and then helped with an art history course while traveling for a semester in Europe I've spent a lot of time looking at small pictures of a lot of art.

Some moments for me where I just had to sit down because I was so emotionally overcome were: seeing Raphael's Sistine Madonna in Dresden (the room just pulled me in), seeing the bust of Charlemagne in Aachen (he was on the cover of one of my textbooks), seeing all of the Old Masters at the Hermitage, The Dying Lioness at the British Museum. I could go on and on in each museum I've visited. I've never been underwhelmed.

One thing I've done to slow myself down from finding my favorites in a museum is to see what I want to see in a room and then find one other painting I'm drawn to that I didn't know previously and spend some time with getting to know that painting and artist. The painting, so far, that has moved me the most is The Execution Lady Jane Grey in the National Gallery. I wish they had a seat closer to that painting.

My 10 year old granddaughter had one of those experiences last summer at Musee d'Orsay. We were headed to see Degas' Little Dancer (her wish), going the long way through the Impressionist Wing. I told her it would be towards the end and tried to keep her engaged along the way but she kept moving faster and faster. Finally we had to all give up our slow walk and find her where she stood for the longest time checking out the bronze from every angle. She was transfixed. We eventually worked our way back through the wing and she liked that too but all she could talk about were the Degas'.